Clinical governance: Bridging the gap between managerial and clinical approaches to quality of care

80Citations
Citations of this article
223Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Clinical governance has been introduced as a new approach to quality improvement in the UK national health service. This article maps clinical governance against a discussion of the four main approaches to measuring and improving quality of care: quality assessment, quality assurance, clinical audit, and quality improvement (including continuous quality improvement). Quality assessment underpins each approach. Whereas clinical audit has, in general, been professionally led, managers have driven quality improvement initiatives. Quality assurance approaches have been perceived to be externally driven by managers or to involve professional inspection. It is discussed how clinical governance seeks to bridge these approaches. Clinical governance allows clinicians in the UK to lead a comprehensive strategy to improve quality within provider organisations, although with an expectation of greatly increased external accountability. Clinical governance aims to bring together managerial, organisational, and clinical approaches to improving quality of care. If successful, it will define a new type of professionalism for the next century. Failure by the professions to seize the opportunity is likely to result in increasingly detailed external control of clinical activity in the UK, as has occurred in some other countries.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Buetow, S. A., & Roland, M. (1999). Clinical governance: Bridging the gap between managerial and clinical approaches to quality of care. Quality in Health Care. BMJ Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.8.3.184

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free