title: Developing effective feedback on quality of anaesthetic care: what are its most valuable characteristics from a clinical perspective?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Research suggests that better feedback from quality and safety indicators leads to enhanced capability of clinicians and departments to improve care and change behaviour. The aim of the current study was to investigate the characteristics of feedback perceived by clinicians to be of most value.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data were collected using a survey designed as part of a wider evaluation of a data feedback initiative in anaesthesia. Eighty-nine consultant anaesthetists from two English NHS acute Trusts completed the survey. Multiple linear regression with hierarchical variable entry was used to investigate which characteristics of feedback predict its perceived usefulness for monitoring variation and improving care.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The final model demonstrated that the relevance of the quality indicators to the specific service area (β=0.64, p=0.01) and the credibility of the data as coming from a trustworthy, unbiased source (β=0.55, p=0.01) were the significant predictors, having controlled for all other covariates.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  For clinicians to engage with effective quality monitoring and feedback, the perceived local relevance of indicators and trust in the credibility of the resulting data are paramount.
authors.affiliation: Research Psychologist, Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, UK d.dlima@imperial.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Danielle M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: D'Lima
authors.affiliation: Researcher, Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, UK.
authors.forename: Joanna
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Moore
authors.affiliation: Senior Lecturer, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, UK.
authors.forename: Alex
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Bottle
authors.affiliation: Consultant Intensivist, Centre for Perioperative Medicine and Critical Care Research, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, UK.
authors.forename: Stephen J
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Brett
authors.affiliation: Consultant Anaesthetist, Department of Anaesthesia, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, UK.
authors.forename: Glenn M
authors.initials: GM
authors.lastname: Arnold
authors.affiliation: Lecturer, Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, UK.
authors.forename: Jonathan
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Benn
mesh_terms: D000776:Anesthesiology / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000592:standards; D002983:Clinical Competence; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004739:England; D005246:Feedback; D006302:Health Services Research; D006801:Humans; D015279:Organizational Culture; D019984:Quality Indicators, Health Care / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000592:standards; D013222:State Medicine / Q000458:organization & administration
keywords: feedback; patient safety; quality indicator