Clinical audit; Who is auditing who?

Scottish Medical Journal

Volumn 43, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 185-188

  Currie, I S ^a   Paterson Brown, S ^a  

^a ROYAL INFIRMARY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Clinical audit; not common, not done well; Royal colleges poorly prepared for audit; Tomorrow's consultants; how can they be good at audit?

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; EXPERIENCE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICAL EDUCATION; PATIENT CARE; PHYSICIAN; QUESTIONNAIRE;

EID: 0032412705     PISSN: 00369330     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/003693309804300609     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Working for patients. London: HMSO, 1989.
2. Working for patients, Medical Audit: Scottish Working Paper No. 2 London. HMSO; 1989.
3. Kinn SR, Smith, PJ Medical audit activity in primary and secondary care in the West of Scotland. Health Bull. 1996; 54:252-267
4. McCarthy MJ, Byrne G.J. Surgical audit: the junior doctors'viewpoint. J. R. Coll. Surg. Edinb. 1997;42: 317-318.
5. Black N, Thompson E. Obstacles to medical audit: British doctors speak. Soc. Sci. Med. 1993;36: 849-856.
6. Royal College of Physicians. Medical Audit: a first report. What, why and how? London: The Royal College of Physicians of London 1989.
7. Gailey F. Clinical Audit Enabler. Edinburgh: Lothian Clinical Audit, 1996: 57.
8. Newman K, Pyne T. Quality matters: junior doctors' perceptions. Journal of Management in Medicine 1996;19: 12-23.
9. Lawrence M, Griew K, Derry J, Anderson J, Humphreys J. Auditing Audits: use and development of the Oxfordshire Medical Audit Advisory Group rating system. Br Med J 1994;309: 513-516.