This study sought to elucidate the contribution of peer review groups involving psychiatrists to quality improvement and quality care.
Audio-taped interviews of groups engaged in peer review were analysed using a qualitative methodology.
Participants'views of the ways in which they experienced and conceptualised peer review were explored.
The views of participants in peer review groups were analysed, and categories evolved which identified differences in how they perceived the structure and function of group peer review.
Participants in the groups studied perceived peer review as a professional growth forum within a quality improvement framework providing critical review of treatment, continuing education, and a sense of collegiality.
Boundaries of acceptable practice were tested and defined.
At its best, participation in peer review groups enhanced reflective practice which achieved new understandings of clinical work.
In this regard, peer review is seen as a highly desirable method for the maintenance of professional standards.
Mots-clés Pascal : Psychiatre, Formation permanente, Relation interpair, Qualité, Soin, Traitement, Enquête, Personnel sanitaire, Perception sociale, Australie, Océanie, Homme, Groupe travail
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Psychiatrist, Continuing education, Peer relation, Quality, Care, Treatment, Inquiry, Health staff, Social perception, Australia, Oceania, Human
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 96-0504500
Code Inist : 002B18H04. Création : 10/04/1997.