Audit and feedback and clinical practice guideline adherence: Making feedback actionable

BACKGROUND: As a strategy for improving clinical practice guideline (CPG) adherence, audit and feedback (A&F) has been found to be variably effective, yet A&F research has not investigated the impact of feedback characteristics on its effectiveness. This paper explores how high performing facilities (HPF) and low performing facilities (LPF) differ in the way they use clinical audit data for feedback purposes. METHOD: Descriptive, qualitative, cross-sectional study of a purposeful sample of six Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) with high and low adherence to six CPGs, as measured by external chart review audits. One-hundred and two employees involved with outpatient CPG implementation across the six facilities participated in one-hour semi-structured interviews where they discussed strategies, facilitators and barriers to implementing CPGs. Interviews were analyzed using techniques from the grounded theory method. RESULTS: High performers provided timely, individualized, non-punitive feedback to providers, whereas low performers were more variable in their timeliness and non-punitiveness and relied on more standardized, facility-level reports. The concept of actionable feedback emerged as the core category from the data, around which timeliness, individualization, non-punitiveness, and customizability can be hierarchically ordered. CONCLUSION: Facilities with a successful record of guideline adherence tend to deliver more timely, individualized and non-punitive feedback to providers about their adherence than facilities with a poor record of guideline adherence. Consistent with findings from organizational research, feedback intervention characteristics may influence the feedback's effectiveness at changing desired behaviors

How authentic leadership influences team performance:the mediating role of team reflexivity

This study examines how authentic leadership influences team performance via the mediating mechanism of team reflexivity. Adopting a self-regulatory perspective, we propose that authentic leadership will predict the specific team regulatory process of reflexivity, which in turn will be associated with two outcomes of team performance; effectiveness and productivity. Using survey data from 53 teams in three organizations in the United Kingdom and Greece and controlling for collective trust, we found support for our stated hypotheses with the results indicating a significant fully mediated relationship. As predicted the self-regulatory behaviors inherent in the process of authentic leadership served to collectively shape team behavior, manifesting in the process of team reflexivity, which, in turn, positively predicted team performance. We conclude with a discussion of how this study extends theoretical understanding of authentic leadership in relation to teamwork and delineate several practical implications for leaders and organizations

A standard for test reliability in group research

Contains fulltext : 116585.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Many authors adhere to the rule that test reliabilities should be at least .70 or .80 in group research. This article introduces a new standard according to which reliabilities can be evaluated. This standard is based on the costs or time of the experiment and of administering the test. For example, if test administration costs are 7 % of the total experimental costs, the efficient value of the reliability is .93. If the actual reliability of a test is equal to this efficient reliability, the test size maximizes the statistical power of the experiment, given the costs. As a standard in experimental research, it is proposed that the reliability of the dependent variable be close to the efficient reliability. Adhering to this standard will enhance the statistical power and reduce the costs of experiments.9 p