Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Auditing the audit cycle: an open‐ended evaluation

Auditing the audit cycle: an open‐ended evaluation Most studies looking into completion of the audit cycle, have investigated specific interventions rather than entire projects. This study was carried out to evaluate the successful completion of the audit cycle depending on whether or not recommendations were acted on; and to find out relevant confounding factors. This was a retrospective review of the recommendations of audits between March 1999 and October 2002. There were 29 projects with a total of 63 recommendations. While 24 had been implemented, action had been only initiated in two and was in progress in one. A total of 17 recommendations were still under discussion. There were three types of inaction – no action because of no recommendations ( n =8), action no longer appropriate ( n =1) and specific obstacles preventing implementation ( n =10). There were no significant differences between the outcomes (Chi square=0.128, dF=1, p =0.720). Investigation into the outcomes of audit recommendations is a useful way of assessing the entire audit cycle. However it also throws up a number of contextual issues that can influence outcome and should be taken into account when monitoring change in clinical settings. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Clinical Governance An International Journal Emerald Publishing

Auditing the audit cycle: an open‐ended evaluation

Download PDF
5 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/auditing-the-audit-cycle-an-open-ended-evaluation-UsEcaVbQSo

References (15)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
1477-7274
DOI
10.1108/14777270410536394
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Most studies looking into completion of the audit cycle, have investigated specific interventions rather than entire projects. This study was carried out to evaluate the successful completion of the audit cycle depending on whether or not recommendations were acted on; and to find out relevant confounding factors. This was a retrospective review of the recommendations of audits between March 1999 and October 2002. There were 29 projects with a total of 63 recommendations. While 24 had been implemented, action had been only initiated in two and was in progress in one. A total of 17 recommendations were still under discussion. There were three types of inaction – no action because of no recommendations ( n =8), action no longer appropriate ( n =1) and specific obstacles preventing implementation ( n =10). There were no significant differences between the outcomes (Chi square=0.128, dF=1, p =0.720). Investigation into the outcomes of audit recommendations is a useful way of assessing the entire audit cycle. However it also throws up a number of contextual issues that can influence outcome and should be taken into account when monitoring change in clinical settings.

Journal

Clinical Governance An International Journal – Emerald Publishing

Published: Jun 1, 2004

Keywords: Auditing; Assessment

There are no references for this article.