TABLE 5.

Comparison of Quality-Oriented Climate in Intervention and Control Clinics^†

	Baseline			Follow-up			Adjusted Difference¶
	Intervention (n = 151)	Control (n = 290)	P	Intervention (n = 164)	Control (n = 403)	P	Intervention (n = 4 clinics)	Control (n = 17 clinics)	P
Prioritization of quality Care‡	3.49	3.63	0.19	3.73	3.80	0.47	0.14	0.17	0.71
High-quality relationships§	3.54	3.74	0.24	3.81	3.84	0.84	0.20	0.06	0.60
Open communication‖	3.29	3.50	0.12	3.53	3.52	0.91	0.05	0.03	0.90

P-values indicate the statistical significance of the difference between the preceding values for the intervention and control clinics.

^*Aspects of climate were measured on a scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.

^†Values presented in table are based on the responses of clinical and administrative support staff only. Clinical leaders’ ratings, which were significantly higher than clinical and administrative support staff’s (Table 4), resulted in the same findings. Table based on clinical leaders’ responses not shown for parsimony. At baseline, a total of 441 staff members (79%) completed the survey, with a mean of 21 respondents per clinic (intervention group mean = 38; control group mean = 17). At follow-up, 567 staff members (80%) returned surveys, with a mean of 27 respondents per clinic (intervention group mean = 41; control group mean = 24).

^‡Difference between baseline and follow-up was significant in intervention group (P < 0.01) and in control group (P < 0.01).

^§Difference between baseline and follow-up was significant in intervention group (P = 0.02), but not in control group (P = 0.17).

^‖Difference between baseline and follow-up was significant in intervention group (P = 0.01), but not in control group (P = 0.79).

^¶Difference between baseline and follow-up was adjusted for baseline performance.