IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i5p4490-d1086473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audit as a Tool for Improving the Quality of Stroke Care: A Review

Author

Listed:
  • Irene Cappadona

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

  • Francesco Corallo

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

  • Davide Cardile

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

  • Augusto Ielo

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

  • Placido Bramanti

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

  • Viviana Lo Buono

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

  • Rosella Ciurleo

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

  • Giangaetano D’Aleo

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

  • Maria Cristina De Cola

    (IRCCS Centro Neurolesi Bonino-Pulejo, S.S. 113 Via Palermo, C.da Casazza, 98124 Messina, Italy)

Abstract

Introduction: A clinical audit is a tool that allows the evaluation of and improvement in the quality of stroke care processes. Fast, high-quality care and preventive interventions can reduce the negative impact of stroke. Objective: This review was conducted on studies investigating the effectiveness of clinical audits to improve the quality of stroke rehabilitation and stroke prevention. Method: We reviewed clinical trials involving stroke patients. Our search was performed on PubMed databases, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases. Of the 2543 initial studies, 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. Results: Studies showed that an audit brought an improvement in rehabilitation processes when it included a team of experts, an active training phase with facilitators, and short-term feedback. In contrast, studies looking at an audit in stroke prevention showed contradictory results. Conclusions: A clinical audit highlights any deviations from clinical best practices in order to identify the causes of inefficient procedures so that changes can be implemented to improve the care system. In the rehabilitation phase, the audit is effective for improving the quality of care processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Irene Cappadona & Francesco Corallo & Davide Cardile & Augusto Ielo & Placido Bramanti & Viviana Lo Buono & Rosella Ciurleo & Giangaetano D’Aleo & Maria Cristina De Cola, 2023. "Audit as a Tool for Improving the Quality of Stroke Care: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-11, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4490-:d:1086473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4490/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4490/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fehr, Ernst & Falk, Armin, 2002. "Psychological foundations of incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 687-724, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McCausland, David & Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2005. "Some are Punished and Some are Rewarded: A Study of the Impact of Performance Pay on Job Satisfaction," MPRA Paper 14243, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Bruno S. Frey & Susanne Neckermann, 2005. "Auszeichnungen: Ein Vernachl�ssigter Anreiz," IEW - Working Papers 254, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Francesco Rullani, 2005. "The Debate and the Community. “Reflexive Identity” in the FLOSS Community," LEM Papers Series 2005/18, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    4. Jordi Brandts & David J. Cooper, 2005. "It's What You Say Not What You Pay," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 643.05, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    5. Sseruyange, J. & Bulte, E., 2018. "Do Incentives matter for Knowledge Diffusion? Experimental Evidence from Uganda," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275896, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Jahnke, Bjoern, 2015. "Tax morale and reciprocity. A case study from Vietnam," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-563, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    7. Sauermann, Jan, 2015. "Worker Reciprocity and the Returns to Training: Evidence from a Field Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 9179, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Dato, Simon & Grunewald, Andreas & Kräkel, Matthias & Müller, Daniel, 2016. "Asymmetric employer information, promotions, and the wage policy of firms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 273-300.
    9. Emil Inauen & Katja Rost & Margit Osterloh & Bruno S. Frey, 2010. "Back to the Future –A Monastic Perspective on Corporate Governance," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 21(1), pages 38-59.
    10. Lambsdorff, Johann Graf & Grubiak, Kevin & Werner, Katharina, 2023. "Intrinsic Motivation vs. Corruption? Experimental Evidence on the Performance of Officials," MPRA Paper 118153, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2011. "Farmers adoption of integrated crop protection and organic farming: Do moral and social concerns matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1536-1545, June.
    12. Jie, Yun, 2020. "Responding to requests for help: Effects of payoff schemes with small monetary units," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Ramm, Joachim & Tjøtta, Sigve & Torsvik, Gaute, 2013. "Incentives and creativity in groups," Working Papers in Economics 06/13, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    14. Charles Bellemare & Bruce Shearer, 2011. "On The Relevance And Composition Of Gifts Within The Firm: Evidence From Field Experiments," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(3), pages 855-882, August.
    15. Andrei Bremzen & Elena Khokhlova & Anton Suvorov & Jeroen van de Ven, 2015. "Bad News: An Experimental Study on the Informational Effects Of Rewards," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(1), pages 55-70, March.
    16. Yusuf, Fatima & Yousaf, Amna & Saeed, Abubakr, 2018. "Rethinking agency theory in developing countries: A case study of Pakistan," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 281-292.
    17. Galbiati, Roberto & Vertova, Pietro, 2008. "Obligations and cooperative behaviour in public good games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 146-170, September.
    18. Goswami, Indranil & Urminsky, Oleg, 2021. "Don’t fear the meter: How longer time limits bias managers to prefer hiring with flat fee compensation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 42-58.
    19. repec:dgr:rugsom:04g06 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk, 2010. "You Get What You Pay For: Incentives and Selection in the Education System," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(546), pages 256-271, August.
    21. Marianna Belloc & Samuel Bowles, 2009. "International Trade, Factor Mobility and the Persistence of Cultural-Institutional Diversity," Working Papers in Public Economics 126, University of Rome La Sapienza, Department of Economics and Law.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4490-:d:1086473. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.