Identifying poor performance among doctors in NHS organizations

Rachel Locke, Samantha Scallan, Camilla Leach, Mark Rickenbach

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim To account for the means by which poor performance among career doctors is identified by National Health Service organizations, whether the tools are considered effective and how these processes may be strengthened in the light of revalidation and the requirement for doctors to demonstrate their fitness to practice. Method This study sought to look beyond the 'doctor as individual'; as well as considering the typical approaches to managing the practice of an individual, the systems within which the doctor is working were reviewed, as these are also relevant to standards of performance. A qualitative review was undertaken consisting of a literature review of current practice, a policy review of current documentation from 15 trusts in one deanery locality, and 14 semi-structured interviews with respondents with an overview of processes in use. The framework for the analysis of the data considered tools at three levels: individual, team and organizational. Results Tools are, in the main, reactive - with an individual focus. They rely on colleagues and others to speak out, so their effectiveness is hindered by a reluctance to do so. Tools can lack an evidence base for their use, and there is limited linking of data across contexts and tools. Conclusions There is more work to be done in evaluating current tools and developing stronger processes. Linkage between data sources needs to be improved and proactive tools at the organizational level need further development to help with the early identification of performance issues. This would also assist in balancing a wider systems approach with a current over emphasis on individual doctors.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)882-888
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Volume19
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2013

Keywords

  • clinical governance
  • doctors
  • health care
  • NHS organizations
  • performance
  • revalidation

Cite this

Locke, R., Scallan, S., Leach, C., & Rickenbach, M. (2013). Identifying poor performance among doctors in NHS organizations. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 19(5), 882-888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01868.x
Locke, Rachel ; Scallan, Samantha ; Leach, Camilla ; Rickenbach, Mark. / Identifying poor performance among doctors in NHS organizations. In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2013 ; Vol. 19, No. 5. pp. 882-888.
@article{8240065d352446cc927d84b68f57f454,
title = "Identifying poor performance among doctors in NHS organizations",
abstract = "Aim To account for the means by which poor performance among career doctors is identified by National Health Service organizations, whether the tools are considered effective and how these processes may be strengthened in the light of revalidation and the requirement for doctors to demonstrate their fitness to practice. Method This study sought to look beyond the 'doctor as individual'; as well as considering the typical approaches to managing the practice of an individual, the systems within which the doctor is working were reviewed, as these are also relevant to standards of performance. A qualitative review was undertaken consisting of a literature review of current practice, a policy review of current documentation from 15 trusts in one deanery locality, and 14 semi-structured interviews with respondents with an overview of processes in use. The framework for the analysis of the data considered tools at three levels: individual, team and organizational. Results Tools are, in the main, reactive - with an individual focus. They rely on colleagues and others to speak out, so their effectiveness is hindered by a reluctance to do so. Tools can lack an evidence base for their use, and there is limited linking of data across contexts and tools. Conclusions There is more work to be done in evaluating current tools and developing stronger processes. Linkage between data sources needs to be improved and proactive tools at the organizational level need further development to help with the early identification of performance issues. This would also assist in balancing a wider systems approach with a current over emphasis on individual doctors.",
keywords = "clinical governance, doctors, health care, NHS organizations, performance, revalidation",
author = "Rachel Locke and Samantha Scallan and Camilla Leach and Mark Rickenbach",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01868.x",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "882--888",
number = "5",

}

Locke, R, Scallan, S, Leach, C & Rickenbach, M 2013, 'Identifying poor performance among doctors in NHS organizations', Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 882-888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01868.x

Identifying poor performance among doctors in NHS organizations. / Locke, Rachel; Scallan, Samantha; Leach, Camilla; Rickenbach, Mark.

In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 19, No. 5, 01.10.2013, p. 882-888.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identifying poor performance among doctors in NHS organizations

AU - Locke, Rachel

AU - Scallan, Samantha

AU - Leach, Camilla

AU - Rickenbach, Mark

PY - 2013/10/1

Y1 - 2013/10/1

N2 - Aim To account for the means by which poor performance among career doctors is identified by National Health Service organizations, whether the tools are considered effective and how these processes may be strengthened in the light of revalidation and the requirement for doctors to demonstrate their fitness to practice. Method This study sought to look beyond the 'doctor as individual'; as well as considering the typical approaches to managing the practice of an individual, the systems within which the doctor is working were reviewed, as these are also relevant to standards of performance. A qualitative review was undertaken consisting of a literature review of current practice, a policy review of current documentation from 15 trusts in one deanery locality, and 14 semi-structured interviews with respondents with an overview of processes in use. The framework for the analysis of the data considered tools at three levels: individual, team and organizational. Results Tools are, in the main, reactive - with an individual focus. They rely on colleagues and others to speak out, so their effectiveness is hindered by a reluctance to do so. Tools can lack an evidence base for their use, and there is limited linking of data across contexts and tools. Conclusions There is more work to be done in evaluating current tools and developing stronger processes. Linkage between data sources needs to be improved and proactive tools at the organizational level need further development to help with the early identification of performance issues. This would also assist in balancing a wider systems approach with a current over emphasis on individual doctors.

AB - Aim To account for the means by which poor performance among career doctors is identified by National Health Service organizations, whether the tools are considered effective and how these processes may be strengthened in the light of revalidation and the requirement for doctors to demonstrate their fitness to practice. Method This study sought to look beyond the 'doctor as individual'; as well as considering the typical approaches to managing the practice of an individual, the systems within which the doctor is working were reviewed, as these are also relevant to standards of performance. A qualitative review was undertaken consisting of a literature review of current practice, a policy review of current documentation from 15 trusts in one deanery locality, and 14 semi-structured interviews with respondents with an overview of processes in use. The framework for the analysis of the data considered tools at three levels: individual, team and organizational. Results Tools are, in the main, reactive - with an individual focus. They rely on colleagues and others to speak out, so their effectiveness is hindered by a reluctance to do so. Tools can lack an evidence base for their use, and there is limited linking of data across contexts and tools. Conclusions There is more work to be done in evaluating current tools and developing stronger processes. Linkage between data sources needs to be improved and proactive tools at the organizational level need further development to help with the early identification of performance issues. This would also assist in balancing a wider systems approach with a current over emphasis on individual doctors.

KW - clinical governance

KW - doctors

KW - health care

KW - NHS organizations

KW - performance

KW - revalidation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84884997457&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01868.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01868.x

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 882

EP - 888

IS - 5

ER -

Locke R, Scallan S, Leach C, Rickenbach M. Identifying poor performance among doctors in NHS organizations. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2013 Oct 1;19(5):882-888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01868.x