Key Points
-
Compares the self-assessment process with external assessment in relation to practice standards.
-
Details the nature of support provided by Clinical Governance Advisers.
-
Compares progress made by practices receiving personal support with those that did not.
-
Clinical governance systems at baseline were very weak.
-
Costs and lack of support staff were seen as barriers to making improvements.
Abstract
Aim The purpose of this paper is to share information derived from the Glasgow Quality Practice Initiative with general dental practice teams, Dental Practice Advisers and others involved in quality improvement.
Method A sample of 16 general dental practices was selected from volunteers to receive assistance in working towards a Quality Practice Award. Two Clinical Governance Advisers were appointed to provide this support.
Data collected Quantitative, qualitative and observational data were collected, and comparisons made between practices that had and had not received support.
Results Selected results are presented demonstrating both the baseline position and comparisons of the 'Intervention' and 'Non-Intervention' groups.
Conclusions and recommendations Baseline levels of quality assurance were generally poor. It is asserted that the practices receiving Clinical Governance Adviser support benefited from the experience and made meaningful improvements. This has implications for the development of national policy in Scotland.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Draft National Standards for Dental Services. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive, March 2004.
An Action Plan for Improving Oral Health and Modernising NHS Dental Services in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive, March 2005.
www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/bills/pdfs/b33s2-intro-pm.pdf (Accessed 8/9/05)
Smoking, Health and Social Care (Scotland) Act 2005: Eliz II, 2005 asp13. Scottish Parliament. Stationery Office.
http://www.bda.org/advice/goodpractice.cfm?ContentID=524 (Accessed 8/9/05)
http://www.denplanexcel.co.uk/ (Accessed 8/9/05)
Holden L, Moore R . The development of a model and implementation process for clinical governance in primary dental care. Br Dent J 2004; 196: 21–24.
Whittle J, Haworth J . Maintaining good dental practice; the East Lancashire approach to dentists whose performance gives cause for concern. Br Dent J 2000; 188: 539–543.
Donabedian A . An introduction to quality assurance in health care. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Ovretveit J . What are the best strategies for ensuring quality in hospitals? Synthesis Report. World Health Organisation (Europe), 2003.
Grol R . Improving the quality of medical care: Building bridges among professional pride, payer profit, and patient satisfaction [Special Communication]. J Am Med Assoc 2001; 286: 2578–2585.
Grol R, Baker R, Moss F . Quality Improvement Research: Understanding the Science of Change in Health Care. Quality and Safety in Health Care 2002; 11: 110–111.
Mabe P, West S . Validity of self-evaluation ability: a review and meta-analysis. J App Psych 1982; 67: 280–297.
Brutus S, Fleenor J . Does 360-degree feedback work in different industries? A between-industry comparison of the reliability and validity of multi-source performance ratings. J Management Development 1998; 17.
Tracey J M, Arroll B, Richmond D E, Barham P M . The validity of general practitioners' self assessment of knowledge: cross sectional study. Br Med J 1997; 315: 1426–1428
Khan K, Awonuga A, Dwarakanath L, Taylor R . Assessments in evidence-based medicine workshops: Loose connection between perception of knowledge and its objective assessment. Medical Teacher 2001; 23: 92–94.
Cunnington E K W, Reiter J P W, Keane H I, Norman D R . How can I know what I don't know? Poor self assessment in a well defined domain. Advances in Health Sciences Education 2004; 9: 211–224.
Jansen et al. Assessment of competence in technical clinical skills of general practitioners. Medical Education 1995; 29: 2247–2253.
Bousdras et al. Assessment of Surgical Skills in Implant Dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19: 542–548.
Jansen et al. Failure of feedback to enhance self-assessment skills of general practitioners. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 1998; 10: 141–151.
Woolliscroft et al. Medical students' clinical self-assessments – comparisons with external measures of performance and the student's self-assessments of overall performance and effort. Academic Medicine 1993; 68: 285–294.
Lee, Fletcher . Self-assessment in a selection situation: An evaluation of different measurement approaches. J Occupational Organizational Psychol 2002; 75: 145–161.
Stewart et al. Clarifying the concepts of confidence and competence to produce appropriate self-evaluation measurement scales. Medical Evaluation 2000; 34: 903–909.
Glennie Group. Survey of decontamination in primary dental care. Scottish Executive Health Department, 2004. Available from: http://www.show.scot.nhs.uk/sehd/publications/dc20041202dental.pdf (Accessed 08/09/05)
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the funding support received for the project from NHS Greater Glasgow Primary Care Division and from NHS Education for Scotland. The guidance and expertise extended by Professor Pitts and his team from the Dental Health Services Research Unit have been invaluable in the design and evaluation of the project. Thanks are also due to professional colleagues within NHS Quality Improvement Scotland and the Scottish Executive for their contribution to the process.
Within our own team, Vidhyapriya Nagendran and Caroline Smith have worked assiduously to analyse and present the data.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Refereed Paper
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cameron, W., Taylor, G., Broadfoot, R. et al. The role of the Clinical Governance Adviser in supporting quality improvement in general dental practice: the Glasgow Quality Practice Initiative. Br Dent J 202, 193–201 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2007.129
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2007.129
