Table 2 Consistency with selected evidence and theory and potential enhancements

Feedback given by supervisor or peer [7] (e.g. ward manager to ward staff)

Feedback given repeatedly [7] (e.g. daily at ward huddle meeting)

The audit provides feedback to ward staff describing recent (this month’s) performance [10, 11], aside from issues of data accuracy.

Feedback gains attention [11]

Feedback to ward staff is given in person [11]

Feedback to ward staff is given to a group [10, 11]

Recipients feel it is imposed upon them [10]

Data is gathered by feedback recipients [10]

The feedback is not perceived as accurate / credible [10, 11]

Feedback describes team level, rather than individual, performance [10, 11]

Feedback does not indicate trend over time [10]

Feedback does not include solutions to sub-optimal performance [7, 10, 11]

Feedback is perceived to punish sub-optimal performance [10]

Meaningful engagement of staff in the audit re-design

Minimise data collection by automating and using alternative data sources, where possible

Address impacts upon data quality, as discussed below.

Individualise feedback

Present performance over time

Explore influences upon performance and describe how improvements can be made

Explore and address causes of punitive feedback, as discussed below