학술논문

Testing the exportability of a tool for detecting operational problems in VA teaching clinics.
Document Type
article
Source
Journal of general internal medicine. 21(2)
Subject
Humans
Group Processes
Consensus
Choice Behavior
Anthropology
Cultural
United States Department of Veterans Affairs
Education
Medical
Internship and Residency
Faculty
Medical
Health Facility Administrators
Patients
Ambulatory Care Facilities
United States
education
graduate medical
ambulatory care
culture
Anthropology
Cultural
Education
Medical
Faculty
General & Internal Medicine
Clinical Sciences
Language
Abstract
BackgroundRecurrent operational problems in teaching clinics may be caused by the different medical preferences of patients, residents, faculty, and administrators. These preference differences can be identified by cultural consensus analysis (CCA), a standard anthropologic tool.ObjectiveThis study tests the exportability of a unique CCA tool to identify site-specific operational problems at 5 different VA teaching clinics.DesignWe used the CCA tool at 5 teaching clinics to identify group preference differences between the above groups. We averaged the CCA results for all 5 sites. We compared each site with the averages in order to isolate each site's most anomalous responses. Major operational problems were independently identified by workgroups at each site. Cultural consensus analysis performance was then evaluated by comparison with workgroup results.ParticipantsTwenty patients, 10 residents, 10 faculty, members, and 10 administrators at each site completed the CCA. Workgroups included at minimum: a patient, resident, faculty member, nurse, and receptionist or clinic administrator.ApproachCultural consensus analysis was performed at each site. Problems were identified by multidisciplinary workgroups, prioritized by anonymous multivoting, and confirmed by limited field observations and interviews. Cultural consensus analysis results were compared with workgroup results.ResultsThe CCA detected systematic, group-specific preference differences at each site. These were moderately to strongly associated with the problems independently identified by the workgroups. The CCA proved to be a useful tool for exploring the problems in depth and for detecting previously unrecognized problems.ConclusionsThis CCA worked in multiple VA sites. It may be adapted to work in other settings or to better detect other clinic problems.