Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Qualitative Health Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1049732308329481v1
19/2/229    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Parker, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Yano, E. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Parker, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Yano, E. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Article

Creating a Quality-Improvement Dialogue: Utilizing Knowledge From Frontline Staff, Managers, and Experts to Foster Health Care Quality Improvement

Louise E. Parker*, JoAnn E. Kirchner, Laura M. Bonner, Jacqueline J. Fickel, Mona J. Ritchie, Carol E. Simons, and Elizabeth M. Yano

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: parkerlouise{at}earthlink.net.


   Abstract
There is a growing consensus that a hybrid of two common approaches to quality improvement (QI), local participatory QI and expert QI, might be the best method for achieving quality care. Achieving such a hybrid requires that content experts establish an ongoing dialogue with both frontline staff members and managers. In this study we examined frontline staff members’ and managers’ preferences regarding how to conduct such a dialogue, and we provide practical suggestions for implementation. The two groups shared a number of preferences (e.g., verbal facetoface exchanges, discussions focused on quality of care). There were also some differences. For example, although managers were interested in discussions of business aspects (e.g., costs), frontline staff members were concerned with workload issues. Finally, although informants acknowledged that engaging in a QI dialogue was time consuming, they also believed it was essential if health care organizations are to improve the quality of care they provide.

First published on December 17, 2008, doi:10.1177/1049732308329481

Qualitative Health Research 2009;19:229.

A more recent version of this article appeared on February 1, 2009


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
S. van Twillert, K. Postema, J. H. Geertzen, T. Hemminga, and A. T Lettinga
Improving rehabilitation treatment in a local setting: a case study of prosthetic rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation, October 1, 2009; 23(10): 938 - 947.
[Abstract] [PDF]