RSM logo
JRSM

Home Current issue Browse archive Alerts About the journal Feedback
 
J R Soc Med 2001;94:288-289
© 2001 Royal Society of Medicine

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Send a Quick Comment
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Quick Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gnanalingham, J.
Right arrow Articles by Gnanalingham, K. K
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
J R Soc Med 2001;94:288-289
© 2001 The Royal Society of Medicine

An audit of audits: are we completing the cycle?

Janaki Gnanalingham MBBS   Muhuntha G Gnanalingham MRCPCH     Kanna K Gnanalingham PhD MRCS  1

St George's Healthcare NHS Trust, Blackshaw Road, London SW17 0QT;
1 National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London WC1N 3BG, UK

Correspondence to: Mr Kanna K Gnanalingham, ‘Brindhavan’, 11 Deena Close, Queen's Drive, London W3 0HR, UK

Clinical audit plays an important part in the drive to improve quality of patient care and thus forms a cornerstone of clinical governance. We evaluated the standard of clinical audits conducted by all departments in a teaching hospital between 1996 and 1997.

Of a total of 213 audits carried out, 102 (48%) were ‘partial’ and only 29 (14%) were ‘full’. Recommendations for improvement emerged from 134 (63%) of the audits performed. In only 51 audits (24%) was the cycle completed by re-auditing, during the subsequent 3 years.

Most departments undertake clinical audits but failure to close the loop undermines their effectiveness and wastes resources.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JRSMHome page
R. J O'Connor and V. C Neumann
Payment by results or payment by outcome? The history of measuring medicine.
J R Soc Med, May 1, 2006; 99(5): 226 - 231.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Qual Saf Health CareHome page
H Snooks, M Halter, Y Palmer, H Booth, and F Moore
Hearing half the message? A re-audit of the care of patients with acute asthma by emergency ambulance crews in London
Qual. Saf. Health Care, December 1, 2005; 14(6): 455 - 458.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch. Dis. Child.Home page
C M John, D E Mathew, and M G Gnanalingham
An audit of paediatric audits
Arch. Dis. Child., December 1, 2004; 89(12): 1128 - 1129.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Qual Saf Health CareHome page
S M Campbell, M Hann, J Hacker, A Durie, A Thapar, and M O Roland
Quality assessment for three common conditions in primary care: validity and reliability of review criteria developed by expert panels for angina, asthma and type 2 diabetes
Qual. Saf. Health Care, June 1, 2002; 11(2): 125 - 130.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



The Cholesterol Controversy