Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Oct 19:7:60.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-7-60.

The meaning of quality work from the general practitioner's perspective: an interview study

Affiliations

The meaning of quality work from the general practitioner's perspective: an interview study

Eva Lena Strandberg et al. BMC Fam Pract. .

Abstract

Background: The quality of health care and its costs have been a subject of considerable attention and lively discussion. Various methods have been introduced to measure, assess, and improve the quality of health care. Many professionals in health care have criticized quality work and its methods as being unsuitable for health care. The aim of the study was to obtain a deeper understanding of the meaning of quality work from the general practitioner's perspective.

Methods: Fourteen general practitioners, seven women and seven men, were interviewed with the aid of a semi-structured interview guide about their experience of quality work. The interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data collection and analysis were guided by a phenomenological approach intended to capture the essence of the statements.

Results: Two fundamentally different ways to view quality work emerged from the statements: A pronounced top-down perspective with elements of control, and an intra-profession or bottom-up perspective. From the top-down perspective, quality work was described as something that infringes professional freedom. From the bottom-up perspective the statements described quality work as a self-evident duty and as a professional attitude to the medical vocation, guided by the principles of medical ethics. Follow-up with a bottom-up approach is best done in internal processes, with the profession itself designing structures and methods based on its own needs.

Conclusions: The study indicates that general practitioners view internal follow-up as a professional obligation but external control as an imposition. This opposition entails a difficulty in achieving systematism in follow-up and quality work in health care. If the statutory standards for systematic quality work are to gain a real foothold, they must be packaged in such a way that general practitioners feel that both perspectives can be reconciled.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
General practitioner's quality work.

References

    1. SOSFS 1996:24 (M) Socialstyrelsens Allmänna råd om kvalitetssystem i hälso- och sjukvården. (National Board of Health and Welfare proposals; Overall quality indicators in health care and medical services.)
    1. Hälso- och sjukvårdslagen. (The Health and Medical Service Act.) SFS 1982:763, 1996:787.
    1. SOSFS 2005:12 (M) Föreskrifter om Ledningssystem för kvalitet och patientsäkerhet i hälso- och sjukvården . (The National Board of Health and Welfare's regulation concerning management systems for quality and patient safety in health and medical services.)
    1. Erlingsdóttir G. PhD thesis. Ekonomihögskolan, Lunds universitet; 1999. Förförande idéer – Kvalitetssäkring i hälso- och sjukvården. In Swedish. (Seductive ideas – Quality assurance in health care. School of economics and business administration, Lund University)
    1. Berwick DM, Gilbert Knapp M. Theory and practice for measuring health care quality. Health Care Financing Review. 1987:49–55. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources