Medical audit: the differing perspectives of managers and clinicians

J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1992 Apr;26(2):177-80.


The objectives of this study were to gauge the attitudes and perceptions of managers and clinicians to medical audit, and to identify differences which might be barriers to the effective implementation of audit. A questionnaire survey of consultants and health service managers in one health district was conducted prior to the introduction of medical audit. Replies were received from 113/144 (78%) clinicians and 53/70 (76%) managers. Managers and clinicians concurred about the potential benefits of audit but had divergent opinions regarding its disadvantages. Seventy-one per cent of clinicians thought that audit would interfere with clinical work and 41% that audit would consume resources that could be better used on patient care. Only one in eight managers shared these views. Clinicians were divided on the threats to clinical autonomy and were three times more likely than managers to agree that audit would enable managers to influence medical practice. Most clinicians considered that audit would require one session a week, while 49% of responding managers thought audit could be performed within existing timetables. Although managers and clinicians are broadly in favour of the introduction of audit, they differ in their assessment of the time required and the opportunity costs. Appreciation of these differing perspectives should facilitate the effective introduction of audit.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Attitude
  • Attitude of Health Personnel
  • Clinical Medicine
  • England
  • Medical Audit*
  • State Medicine / organization & administration
  • Surveys and Questionnaires