Project Abstract

Project Abstract

by Jonathan Lee -
Number of replies: 3
Jonathan Lee Qualitative Research Methods Research question What are the individual- and system-level barriers to communication and follow-up of subcritical radiology and laboratory test results? Significance and background Though prior studies have demonstrated poor rates of appropriate and timely follow-up of subcritical laboratory and radiology test results, further study is needed to identify specific barriers for intervention for this critical patient safety issue that can lead to delayed diagnoses, poor patient outcomes and closed malpractice claims. Proposed approach We will conduct a qualitative study using semi-structured focus groups (n=8) with healthcare providers from purposefully sampled primary and subspecialty care departments affiliated with San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH). Invitations to participate in focus groups will be sent by e-mail. An interview guide will be developed. Each focus group will last 30-60 minutes and food will be provided to incentivize participants. All focus groups will be recorded and transcribed. We will use an inductive framework to identify emergent themes from the focus group transcripts. Two researchers will independently code each transcript followed by comparisons to develop a consensus coding structure. Similar codes will be merged and duplicate codes eliminated through an iterative process to develop a codebook. Codes will be grouped into major themes and relationships among themes will be identified. Proposed subjects The study will be conducted at SFGH, an urban health system with a large public hospital, comprehensive ambulatory specialty care, and hospital- and community-based primary care clinics. SFGH also represents San Francisco’s largest safety net hospital. Focus groups will be conducted with SFGH healthcare providers (physicians, nurses and nurse practitioners) from purposefully sampled groups. Three separate focus groups will be conducted with physician leaders from radiology, hospital medicine, and the emergency department. Two focus groups will be conducted with multidisciplinary healthcare providers from the SFGH ambulatory care committee, a group focused on the communication and integration of outpatient services on and off the SFGH campus, and from risk management. Three additional focus groups will be conducted with frontline primary care, hospital medicine and emergency medicine providers to confirm our findings.   Anticipated or current challenges 1. Is this enough data for the job? Are the 8 planned focus groups sufficient to address our research question comprehensively with thematic saturation? 2. Generalizability of results to other hospital systems Some of the barriers identified may be specific to SFGH and less generalizable to other hospital systems.
In reply to Jonathan Lee

Re: Project Abstract

by Archna Eniasivam -

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.

In reply to Jonathan Lee

Re: Project Abstract

by Wendy Anderson -

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.