Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHafiz, Nashid
dc.contributor.authorHyun, Karice
dc.contributor.authorTu, Qiang
dc.contributor.authorKnight, Andrew
dc.contributor.authorChow, Clara K.
dc.contributor.authorHespe, Charlotte
dc.contributor.authorBriffa, Tom
dc.contributor.authorGallagher, Robyn
dc.contributor.authorReid, Christopher M.
dc.contributor.authorHare, David L.
dc.contributor.authorZwar, Nicholas
dc.contributor.authorWoodward, Mark
dc.contributor.authorJan, Stephen
dc.contributor.authorAtkins, Emily R.
dc.contributor.authorLaba, Tracey-Lea
dc.contributor.authorHalcomb, Elizabeth
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, Tracey
dc.contributor.authorManandi, Deborah
dc.contributor.authorUsherwood, Tim
dc.contributor.authorRedfern, Julie
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-15T01:49:01Z
dc.date.available2025-01-15T01:49:01Z
dc.date.issued2025en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/33529
dc.description.abstractBackground. The study aimed to understand the acceptability, satisfaction, uptake, utility and feasibility of a quality improvement (QI) intervention to improve care for coronary heart disease (CHD) patients in Australian primary care practices and identify barriers and enablers, including the impact of COVID-19. Methods. Within the QUality improvement for Effectiveness of care for people Living with heart disease (QUEL)study, 26 Australian primary care practices,supported by five Primary Health Networks (PHN) participated in a 1-year QI intervention (November 2019 – November 2020). Data were collected from practices and PHNs staff via surveys and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed with descriptive statistics and thematic analysis, respectively. Results. Feedback was received from 64 participants, including practice team members and PHN staff. Surveys were completed after each of six workshops and at the end of the study. Interviews were conducted with a subgroup of participants (n = 9). Participants reported positive satisfaction with individual QI features such as learning workshops and monthly feedback reports. Overall, the intervention was well-received, with most participants expressing interest in participating in similar programs in the future. COVID-19 and lack of time were identified as common barriers, whereas team collaboration and effective leadership enabled practices’ participation in the QI program. Additionally, 90% of the practices reported COVID-19 effected their participation due to vaccination rollout, telehealth set-up, and continuous operational review shifting their focus from QI. Conclusion. Data-driven QI programs in primary care can boost practice staff confidence and foster increased implementation. Barriers and enablers identified can also support other practices in prioritising effective strategies for future implementation.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherCSIRO Publishingen
dc.relation.ispartofAustralian Journal of Primary Healthen
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0en
dc.subjectcoronary heart diseaseen
dc.subjectCOVID-19en
dc.subjectdataen
dc.subjectmixed methods researchen
dc.subjectprimary careen
dc.subjectprocess evaluationen
dc.subjectqualitative researchen
dc.subjectquality improvementen
dc.titleImplementation of a data-driven quality improvement program in primary care for patients with coronary heart disease: a mixed methods evaluation of acceptability, satisfaction, barriers and enablersen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1071/PY24034
dc.type.pubtypePublisher's versionen
usyd.facultySeS faculties schools::Faculty of Medicine and Health::School of Health Sciencesen
usyd.citation.volume31en
workflow.metadata.onlyNoen


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.