Use of quality improvement methods in Finnish health centres in 1998 and 2003

Figures & data

Table I.  Study population: Samples, respondents, and health centre physicians in the Physician 1998 and 2003 studies.

	The Physician 1998 study (graduated 1977–1986)	The Physician 2003 study (graduated 1982–1991)
	n	n
Study population	5702	5255
Sample	2865	2687
Respondents	2117	1672
Health centre physicians	503	344

Table II.  Quality assurance and quality improvement methods available at the place of work as reported by primary healthcare doctors in 1998 and 2003.¹

	Year 1998	Year 2003
	(n = 486–498)	(n = 333–341)	Change
	%	%	%	p-value
Opportunity to obtain continuing medical education	95.4	95.6	0.2	0.873
In-service training	94.4	93.0	−1.4	0.408
Meetings	94.0	93.2	−0.8	0.676
Opportunity to consult a colleague in own speciality	92.2	92.0	−0.2	0.941
Agreed guidelines on how a certain problem should be solved	86.1	88.2	2.1	0.394
Opportunity to consult a colleague in another speciality	81.5	90.0	8.5	0.001
Client surveys	78.1	81.7	3.6	0.205
Clinical guidelines at the place of work	74.6	91.4	16.8	<0.001
Quality programme manual at the place of work	38.2	48.1	9.9	0.005
Quality circles	32.6	37.2	4.6	0.168
Computer-assisted monitoring of own work	21.9	32.9	11.0	<0.001
Peer reviews	18.7	23.7	5.0	0.083
Video-assisted development of own work	10.7	9.5	−1.2	0.568

¹Proportions (%) of often and occasionally reported methods are calculated together.

Figure 1.  Primary healthcare doctors in the Physician 2003 study: Are the following quality assurance and quality improvement methods available at your place of work? Distribution (%) of answers.