Programme no. 559-P
Professional Development
New organization for quality development in General practice in the Capital Region of Denmark
Eva Branner1, Jesper Lundh*2
1Koncern Praksis Region Hovedstaden H,KAP-H,DK - 3400 Hillerød,Denmark, 2Koncern Praksis Region Hovedstaden H,KAP-H,DK - 3400 Hillerød,Denmark
* = Presenting author
Background: Quality in General Practice in the Capital Region of Denmark (KAP-H) was established in 2013. It is a joint organizational structure between the capital region administrative government agency and the organization for General Practitioners in the capital region (PLO-Hovedstaden). The purpose of the joint organizational structure is to promote quality improvement in general practice and facilitate cross-sectoral collaboration between general practice and the rest of the health care system. 10 hospitals and 1,200 general practitioners deliver health care services to a population of 1.7 million inhabitants. The capital region is divided in 29 municipalities.

The vision is to achieve that general practice, in collaboration with the rest of the health system, provides the best professional, organizational and patient-perceived quality of services.

Results: There has been an improvement in the academic and administrative coordination of continuous quality improvement in general practice.
We have achieved a more efficient use of advisory competencies as we work with projects with specific purposes. However, the common goal for the entire organization has not been clearly defined yet.

The collaboration between consultant types and the area of knowledge sharing needs of further development.

Material/Methods: KAP-H has set up six focus areas and associated consultant types:
• IT and data
Cross-sectoral cooperation
Organization and Management
Patient Safety
Decentralized and Group-based post-graduate education

KAP-H has more than 70 consultants with an average workload of 2 - 6 hours per week.

Conclusion: With the establishment of one large organization some consultants have experienced a greater distance to decisions. It has been difficult to create collaboration across consultant types. Nonetheless some specific projects have succeeded.
Points for discussion: Advantages and disadvantages with centralization of quality development.