Quality Measures Database

Keywords

Domains

Process
	Acceptability
	Accessibility
	Appropriateness
	Competence
	Continuity
	Effectiveness
	Efficiency
	Safety
	Comprehensiveness
	Patient-Centeredness
	Legal

Outcome
	Health Conditions
	Human Function
	Well-Being
	Deaths
	Service Outputs
	Satisfaction
	Impact on Society

Structure
	Physical Infrastructure
	Personnel Management
	Information Management
	Financial Management
	Quality and Safety

Non-Medical Determinants of Health
	Health Behaviors
	Living and Working Conditions
	Personal Resources
	Environmental Factors
	Health Literacy

Equity
	Equity

Specific Conditions
	Comorbid Conditions
	Chronic Conditions
	Acute Conditions
	Substance Abuse
	Anxiety Disorders
	Somatoform Disorders
	Sleep Disorders
	Eating Disorders
	Personality Disorders
	Mood Disorders
	Psychosis
	Impulse Control Disorders
	Elderly
	Reproductive Mental Health Disorders

Special Groups
	Ethnic / Cultural Minorities
	People Who Live in Rural Areas
	People with a Family History of a Mental Health Condition
	Social Service Welfare Recipients
	Homeless or Itinerant
	Unemployed
	Aboriginal
	Seniors in Facilities
	Recent Refugees
	Immigrants
	Residents of Correctional Institutions
	Inner City Residents
	Speakers of English as a Second Language

Age Groups
	Elderly
	Adult
	Youth
	Children
	Children

Gender Groups
	Women
	Men
	Gender Identities Other Than Men or Women

Interventions
	Medication
	Psychotherapy
	Peer Support
	Prevention
	Other Somatic Treatments
	Early Detection
	Health Promotion
	Family Involvement
	Group Treatment
	Self-Management Support
	Rehabilitation
	Physical Health Intervention

Clinical Setting
	Shared Care
	Emergency Services
	School-based Mental Health Services
	Work-based Mental Health Services
	Outreach Services
	Solo Practitioner
	Group Family Practitioner
	Community Health Care Centre
	Walk in Clinics

Level of Evidence

	I	Consistently higher quality studies specifically focused on primary mental health care.
	II	Less rigorous studies specifically focused on primary mental health care or extrapolated from higher quality studies from secondary mental health care.
	III	Preliminary research evidence only or evidence based on consensus opinion only.
	IV	Evidence based on individual expert opinion.
	V	Validated scale: Research has been conducted to determine it has at least some properties associated with a high quality scale
	VI	Non-validated scale: Research regarding the quality of the scale has not been conducted.

Measure Ranking

From To

Detailed Results

Use checkboxes to select measures to print or display

PHC Effective Teamwork Scale

Overall Rank: 137

Use of the Primary Health Care Team questionnaire, to evaluate the effectiveness of teamwork amongst providers in collaborative primary health care.

Domain : Shared Care

Collaboration between providers from primary health care and mental health disciplines who share the responsibility for the care an individual receives.
Additional Domain(s) : Continuity, Quality and Safety

Rationale

a) Effective Practice (what is the practice that you wish to measure?): Effectiveness of the teamwork of providers in Shared Care
b) Purpose of Measurement (what do you wish to measure: implementation of the practice, or patient outcome?): Canadian adaptation of the Andersen, Poulta [I think] et al. measure. A questionnaire for all providers.

Primary Reference

Poulton BC, West M. The determinants of effectiveness in primary health care teams. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 1999;13:7–18.

Level of Evidence

IV: Evidence based on individual expert opinion.

Summarized Comments

Add Comment

Its not enough to know if the team is working well together - need to know if outcomes improved, access enhanced; patient satisfaction levels higher.
* Have used this - not sure of its effectiveness to initiate quality change.
* This may be useful once - when teams initially set up.
I wouldn't tend to want to use team functioning measures as routine measures for quality measurement. they serve purpose of helping teams "self-diagnose" their funcitoning and identifying issues they can improve. I would keep quality indicators focussed m
More research data needed re validityreliability of this across populations before implementation

Variation in Results

Ratings-based Rank

Relevance	139
Actionability	121
Overall Importance	152

Stakeholder Rank

Academics	144
Clinicians	140
Consumers	111
Decision Makers	138

�

Special Group Rank

First Nations	120
Rural Areas	125
Federal Stakeholders	133

Regional Rank

BC	AB	SK	MB	ON	QC	NB	NS	PE	NL	YT	NT	NU
124	136	106	139	124	151	107	125	116	89	146	80	74

Overall Rank

137

SA17e (H719)

Distribution of Survey Respondent Ratings

Relevance

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Low

High

Actionability

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Low

High

Overall Importance

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

3 = can live without
2 = nice to have
1 = indispensable

Use checkboxes to select measures to print or display

The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the official policies of Health Canada