2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/152645
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Model To Improve Delivery of Clinical Preventive Services among Health Plans
Abstract:
Model To Improve Delivery of Clinical Preventive Services among Health Plans
Conference Sponsor:Sigma Theta Tau International
Conference Year:2002
Conference Date:July, 2002
Author:Griffith, Hurdis, PhD
P.I. Institution Name:Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Title:Dean and Professor
Objective: Clinicians contract with a number of HPs and are confronted with many sets of conflicting guidelines for preventive care. Lack of a consistent approach to the delivery of clinical preventive practices may be a contributing factor to NJ's HP's rate of delivery of CPS being below state and national goals. To address this concern, the Medical Directors of the nine largest HPs in NJ identified a consistent set of eighteen CPS guidelines to be used by their contracted clinicians in an effort to improve the delivery of preventive care. Therefore, the objective of this study was to inform clinicians about the CPS identified by the Medical Directors as highest priority for implementation, determine their readiness in support of these guidelines, and identify facilitators and barriers to their implementation. Design: Descriptive study. Sample, Population, Setting, Years: Three focus groups were conducted (N=29). Each group consisted of clinicians that were directly involved in delivering preventive services for pediatric, adult and geriatric clients. Sessions were held across New Jersey to ensure geographic sampling that represented statewide dispersion of clinicians. Intervention and Outcome Variable(s): The expected outcome of this study was the identification of facilitators and barriers to clinicians' implementation of agreed upon guidelines, methods to eliminate barriers to guideline implementation and methods to increase facilitators to guideline implementation. Additionally, clinician feedback was obtained regarding methods to promote "buy-in" to the implementation of agreed upon guidelines by participants' colleagues and ways to disseminate information to colleagues. Methods: Clinicians directly involved in delivering preventive services for pediatric, adult and geriatric clients were invited to participate. A project summary and the eighteen CPS guidelines were then sent to participants in preparation for the meeting. The Moderator facilitated discussion to identify facilitators and barriers to clinicians' implementation of these guidelines, as well as methods to eliminate barriers and to increase facilitators to guideline implementation. Methods to promote "buy-in" to the implementation of agreed upon guidelines by participants' colleagues and ways to disseminate this information to colleagues was also discussed. At each decision point, the Moderator determined the technique to move the group to consensus. Each focus group lasted approximately 2 hours. The entire process was tape recorded with the group members' knowledge. Findings: Content analysis was performed on the transcriptions of the three focus groups. Themes revealed barriers and facilitators regarding cost and reimbursement issues, time constraints, legal issues, inconsistency among HPs tools, tracking issues, internalization of guidelines, and issues affecting the patient-clinician relationship. Conclusions: The methods in this study provided the means to obtain valuable feedback from contracted clinicians and to assess their readiness to implement this consistent set of CPS guidelines in the effort to improve the delivery of CPS in their practices. Implications: The momentum is increasing in support of evidence-based practice that will improve the quality of patient care and decrease the morbidity and mortality of preventable diseases. The information collected at these sessions provides the groundwork necessary to support clinicians, including nurses, in the delivery of CPS.

Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
Jul-2002
Sponsors:
Sigma Theta Tau International

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleModel To Improve Delivery of Clinical Preventive Services among Health Plansen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/152645-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Model To Improve Delivery of Clinical Preventive Services among Health Plans</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Sigma Theta Tau International</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2002</td></tr><tr class="item-conference-date"><td class="label">Conference Date:</td><td class="value">July, 2002</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Griffith, Hurdis, PhD</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Dean and Professor</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">griffith@nightingale.rutgers.e</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">Objective: Clinicians contract with a number of HPs and are confronted with many sets of conflicting guidelines for preventive care. Lack of a consistent approach to the delivery of clinical preventive practices may be a contributing factor to NJ's HP's rate of delivery of CPS being below state and national goals. To address this concern, the Medical Directors of the nine largest HPs in NJ identified a consistent set of eighteen CPS guidelines to be used by their contracted clinicians in an effort to improve the delivery of preventive care. Therefore, the objective of this study was to inform clinicians about the CPS identified by the Medical Directors as highest priority for implementation, determine their readiness in support of these guidelines, and identify facilitators and barriers to their implementation. Design: Descriptive study. Sample, Population, Setting, Years: Three focus groups were conducted (N=29). Each group consisted of clinicians that were directly involved in delivering preventive services for pediatric, adult and geriatric clients. Sessions were held across New Jersey to ensure geographic sampling that represented statewide dispersion of clinicians. Intervention and Outcome Variable(s): The expected outcome of this study was the identification of facilitators and barriers to clinicians' implementation of agreed upon guidelines, methods to eliminate barriers to guideline implementation and methods to increase facilitators to guideline implementation. Additionally, clinician feedback was obtained regarding methods to promote &quot;buy-in&quot; to the implementation of agreed upon guidelines by participants' colleagues and ways to disseminate information to colleagues. Methods: Clinicians directly involved in delivering preventive services for pediatric, adult and geriatric clients were invited to participate. A project summary and the eighteen CPS guidelines were then sent to participants in preparation for the meeting. The Moderator facilitated discussion to identify facilitators and barriers to clinicians' implementation of these guidelines, as well as methods to eliminate barriers and to increase facilitators to guideline implementation. Methods to promote &quot;buy-in&quot; to the implementation of agreed upon guidelines by participants' colleagues and ways to disseminate this information to colleagues was also discussed. At each decision point, the Moderator determined the technique to move the group to consensus. Each focus group lasted approximately 2 hours. The entire process was tape recorded with the group members' knowledge. Findings: Content analysis was performed on the transcriptions of the three focus groups. Themes revealed barriers and facilitators regarding cost and reimbursement issues, time constraints, legal issues, inconsistency among HPs tools, tracking issues, internalization of guidelines, and issues affecting the patient-clinician relationship. Conclusions: The methods in this study provided the means to obtain valuable feedback from contracted clinicians and to assess their readiness to implement this consistent set of CPS guidelines in the effort to improve the delivery of CPS in their practices. Implications: The momentum is increasing in support of evidence-based practice that will improve the quality of patient care and decrease the morbidity and mortality of preventable diseases. The information collected at these sessions provides the groundwork necessary to support clinicians, including nurses, in the delivery of CPS.<br/><br/></td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T11:44:10Z-
dc.date.issued2002-07en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T11:44:10Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipSigma Theta Tau Internationalen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.