3.4d. Audit and feedback interventions

  1. Sharon E. Straus MD, FRCPC, MSc3,
  2. Jacqueline Tetroe MA4 and
  3. Ian D. Graham PhD, FCAHS5
  1. Robbie Foy1 and
  2. Martin P. Eccles2

Published Online: 9 JUN 2013

DOI: 10.1002/9781118413555.ch16

Knowledge Translation in Health Care: Moving from Evidence to Practice

Knowledge Translation in Health Care: Moving from Evidence to Practice

How to Cite

Foy, R. and Eccles, M. P. (2013) Audit and feedback interventions, in Knowledge Translation in Health Care: Moving from Evidence to Practice (eds S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe and I. D. Graham), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK. doi: 10.1002/9781118413555.ch16

Editor Information

  1. 3

    Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital; Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

  2. 4

    Knowledge Translation Portfolio, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, ON, Canada

  3. 5

    School of Nursing, University of Ottawa; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa, ON, Canada

Author Information

  1. 1

    University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

  2. 2

    Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Publication History

  1. Published Online: 9 JUN 2013
  2. Published Print: 12 AUG 2013

ISBN Information

Print ISBN: 9781118413548

Online ISBN: 9781118413555

SEARCH

Keywords:

  • chart audits;
  • feedback interventions;
  • health care systems

Summary

Measuring adherence to clinical practice recommendations can highlight important implementation gaps and inform subsequent priorities for knowledge implementation. Data from chart audits help to confirm or identify these gaps and are commonly incorporated into feedback interventions to promote implementation. In chart audits, documented clinical care is measured against a review criterion, defined as,“a systematically developed statement that can be used to assess the appropriateness of specific health care decisions, services, and outcomes”. There are only limited insights into how and when audit and feedback can be made to work more effectively. Ultimately, its selection as a KTA intervention is a matter of judgment based upon the current evidence base, a working diagnosis of the causes of an implementation gap, and the availability of supporting resources and skills. In principle, getting the diagnosis right offers a rational basis for choosing an approach to delivering feedback.