Measuring the quality of clinical audit projects

J Eval Clin Pract. 2000 Nov;6(4):359-70. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.2000.00254.x.


The aim of the study was to develop and pilot a scale measuring the quality of audit projects through audit project reports. Statements about clinical audit projects were selected from existing instruments assessing the quality of clinical audit projects to form a Likert scale. Audit facilitators based in Scottish health boards and trusts piloted the scale. The participants were known to have over 2 years of experience of supporting clinical audit. The response at first test was 11 of 14 and at the second test 27 of 46. Audit facilitators tested the draft scale by expressing their strength of agreement or disagreement with each statement for three reports. Validity and reliability were assessed by test - re-test, item - total, and total - global indicator correlation. Of the 20 statements, 15 had satisfactory correlation with scale totals. Scale totals had good correlation with global indicators. Test re-test correlation was modest. The wide range of responses means further research is needed to measure the consistency of audit facilitators' interpretations, perhaps comparing a trained group with an untrained group. There may be a need for a separate scale for reaudits. Educational impact is distinct from project impact generally. It may be more meaningful to treat the selection of projects and aims, methodology and impact separately as subscales and take a project profiling approach rather than attempting to produce a global quality index.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Female
  • Guideline Adherence / statistics & numerical data*
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Medical Audit / standards*
  • Pilot Projects
  • Quality Assurance, Health Care / classification*
  • Quality Indicators, Health Care*
  • Scotland
  • Surveys and Questionnaires