Here's a word version since the formatting didn't work out well. Thanks.
Interesting question that is best answered with a qualitative approach. The one things I wonder, is if having interdisciplinary groups, will you get a fully honest answer from all providers. For example, if hospitalists feel like radiologists are to fault for some of this or nurses, will they be willing to speak up in front of a group that has members from those groups? Just a thought. Also, how are you defining subcritical radiology and lab test results? Finally, are you including anyone from the laboratory group? I'm sure they would have some interesting input (ex, not being sure who to contact about results, etc).
How did you decide on the 8 focus groups? Just curious. How many providers are you planning on having in each focus group? I think that could potentially affect how much data, etc you receive.
I do agree that the issues at SFGH might not be the same at other hospitals, but I guess that's the point of conducting your initial qualitative study-- to see what the barriers are in general! I think that certain themes will likely overalp despite settings. Others, such as things related to EHR, might be different.
very nicely written and thought out Jonathan. a focus group seems to be an appropriate way to get a groups' thoughts on this question, and food is a great way to get people to a focus group! I would say that 8 groups would be sufficient (though you technically would do them until thematic saturation, you should get some good ideas by 8). Re: the amount of data/number of groups, you can also consider your purpose - for publication you may want to this be more rigorous, whereas for QI, you might just get what you can get. I think using qualitative methods to identify barriers you DON'T already know about is a great approach.