Using the UK primary care Quality and Outcomes Framework to audit health care equity: preliminary data on diabetes management

Reducing health inequalities through general practice: a realist review and action framework

Background

Socio-economic inequalities in health have been in the public agenda for decades. General practice has an influential role to play in mitigating the impact of inequalities especially regarding chronic conditions. At the moment, general practice is dealing with serious challenges in relation to workforce shortages, increasing workload and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is important to identify effective ways so that general practice can play its role in reducing health inequalities.

Objectives

We explored what types of interventions and aspects of routine care in general practice decrease or increase inequalities in health and care-related outcomes. We focused on cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We explored for whom these interventions and aspects of care work best, why, and in what circumstances. Our main objective was to synthesise this evidence into specific guidance for healthcare professionals and decision-makers about how best to achieve equitable general practice.

Design

Realist review.

Main outcome measures

Clinical or care-related outcomes by socio-economic group, or other PROGRESS-Plus criteria.

Review methods

Realist review based on Pawson's five steps: (1) locating existing theories, (2) searching for evidence, (3) selecting articles, (4) extracting and organising data and (5) synthesising the evidence.

Results

Three hundred and twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria and 159 of them were selected for the evidence synthesis. Evidence about the impact of general practice interventions on health inequalities is limited. To reduce health inequalities, general practice needs to be: • connected so that interventions are linked and coordinated across the sector; • intersectional to account for the fact that people's experience is affected by many of their characteristics; • flexible to meet patients' different needs and preferences; • inclusive so that it does not exclude people because of who they are; • community-centred so that people who receive care engage with its design and delivery. These qualities should inform action across four domains: structures like funding and workforce distribution, organisational culture, everyday regulated procedures involved in care delivery, interpersonal and community relationships.

Limitations

The reviewed evidence offers limited detail about the ways and the extent to which specific interventions increase or decrease inequalities in general practice. Therefore, we focused on the underpinning principles that were common across interventions to produce higher-level, transferrable conclusions about ways to achieve equitable care.

Conclusions

Inequalities in general practice result from complex processes across four different domains that include structures, ideas, regulated everyday procedures, and relationships among individuals and communities. To achieve equity, general practice needs to be connected, intersectional, flexible, inclusive and community-centred.

Future work

Future work should focus on how these five essential qualities can be better used to shape the organisational development of future general practice.

Study registration

This trial is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020217871.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR130694) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 7. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Ethnic inequities in the patterns of personalized care adjustments for 'informed dissent' and 'patient unsuitable': a retrospective study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink

BACKGROUND

In England, general practitioners voluntarily take part in the Quality and Outcomes Framework, which is a program that seeks to improve care by rewarding good practice. They can make personalized care adjustments (PCAs), e.g. if patients choose not to have the treatment/intervention offered ('informed dissent') or because they are considered to be clinically 'unsuitable'.

METHODS

Using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (Aurum), this study examined patterns of PCA reporting for 'informed dissent' and 'patient unsuitable', how they vary across ethnic groups and whether ethnic inequities were explained by sociodemographic factors or co-morbidities.

RESULTS

The odds of having a PCA record for 'informed dissent' were lower for 7 of the 10 minoritized ethnic groups studied. Indian patients were less likely than white patients to have a PCA record for 'patient unsuitable'. The higher likelihood of reporting for 'patient unsuitable' among people from Black Caribbean, Black Other, Pakistani and other ethnic groups was explained by co-morbidities and/or area-level deprivation.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings counter narratives that suggest that people from minoritized ethnic groups often refuse medical intervention/treatment. The findings also illustrate ethnic inequities in PCA reporting for 'patient unsuitable', which are linked to clinical and social complexity and should be tackled to improve health outcomes for all.

Reducing health inequalities through general practice

Although general practice can contribute to reducing health inequalities, existing evidence provides little guidance on how this reduction can be achieved. We reviewed interventions influencing health and care inequalities in general practice and developed an action framework for health professionals and decision makers. We conducted a realist review by searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for systematic reviews of interventions into health inequality in general practice. We then screened the studies in the included systematic reviews for those that reported their outcomes by socioeconomic status or other PROGRESS-Plus (Cochrane Equity Methods Group) categories. 159 studies were included in the evidence synthesis. Robust evidence on the effect of general practice on health inequalities is scarce. Focusing on common qualities of interventions, we found that to reduce health inequalities, general practice needs to be informed by five key principles: involving coordinated services across the system (ie, connected), accounting for differences within patient groups (ie, intersectional), making allowances for different patient needs and preferences (ie, flexible), integrating patient worldviews and cultural references (ie, inclusive), and engaging communities with service design and delivery (ie, community-centred). Future work should explore how these principles can inform the organisational development of general practice.

Development and operationalization of a data framework to assess quality of integrated diabetes care in the fragmented data landscape of Belgium

Background

To assess the quality of integrated diabetes care, we should be able to follow the patient throughout the care path, monitor his/her care process and link them to his/her health outcomes, while simultaneously link this information to the primary care system and its performance on the structure and organization related quality indicators. However the development process of such a data framework is challenging, even in period of increasing and improving health data storage and management. This study aims to develop an integrated multi-level data framework for quality of diabetes care and to operationalize this framework in the fragmented Belgium health care and data landscape.

Methods

Based on document reviews, iterative working group discussions and expert consultations, theoretical approaches and quality indicators were identified and assessed. After mapping and assessing the validity of existing health information systems and available data sources through expert consultations, the theoretical framework was translated in a data framework with measurable quality indicators. The construction of the data base included sampling procedures, data-collection, and several technical and privacy-related aspects of linking and accessing Belgian datasets.

Results

To address three dimensions of quality of care, we integrated the chronic care model and cascade of care approach, addressing respectively the structure related quality indicators and the process and outcome related indicators. The corresponding data framework is based on self-collected data at the primary care practice level (using the Assessment of quality of integrated care tool), and linked health insurance data with lab data at the patient level.

Conclusion

In this study, we have described the transition of a theoretical quality of care framework to a unique multilevel database, which allows assessing the quality of diabetes care, by considering the complete care continuum (process and outcomes) as well as organizational characteristics of primary care practices.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08625-8.

Development of a performance measurement system for general practitioners' office in China's primary healthcare

Background

General practitioners are the main providers of primary care services. To better strengthen the important role of general practitioners in primary healthcare services, China is promoting the general practitioners’ office system. There is a lack of well-accepted methods to measure the performance of general practitioner offices in China. We thus aim to develop a systematic and operable performance measurement system for evaluating the general practitioner’s office.

Methods

We establish an index pool of the performance measurement system of general practitioners’ offices by a cross-sectional study and the literature research method and adopt the focus group method to establish the preliminary system. The Delphi method is then used to conduct three rounds of consultation to modify indices, which aims to form the final indicator system. We determine the weight of each index by the analytic hierarchy process method, which together with the final indicator system constitutes the final performance measurement system. Finally, we select three offices from three different cities in Sichuan Province, China, as case offices to conduct the case study, aiming to assess its credibility.

Results

Our results show that the first office scored 958.5 points, the second scored 768.1 points, and the third scored 947.7 points, which corresponds to the reality of these three offices, meaning that the performance measurement system is effective and manoeuvrable.

Conclusions

Our study provides support for standardizing the functions of China’s general practitioner’s office, improving the health service quality of generalists, and providing a theoretical basis for the standardization of the general practitioner’s office.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08569-z.

Improvement of the quality payment program by improving data reporting process: an action research

BACKGROUND

Successful implementation of pay-for-quality (P4Q) programs mostly depends upon a valid, timely, and reliable data about quality measures generated by providers, and interpreted by payers. The aim of this study was to establish a data reporting method for P4Q program through an action research.

METHODS

Qualitative method was used to align theory with action through a three-cycle action research. The study was conducted in September 15, 2015 to March 15, 2017, in East-Azerbaijan, Iran. The purposeful sampling was used to select participants. The participants included healthcare providers, staff in district health centers (DHC), experts, and managers in the provincial primary health center (PPHC). Data was collected by interviews, focus group discussions, and expert panels. Content analysis was used to synthesize the data. In each step, decisions about data reporting methods were made through a consensus of expert panel members.

RESULTS

The most important dimensions of data reporting method were data entry and accuracy, data reporting, data analysis and interpretations, the flexibility of method, and training. By establishment of an online data reporting system for the P4Q program, a major improvement was observed in the documentation of performance data, the satisfaction of health care providers and staff (e.g. either in DHCs or PPHC), improvement of the P4Q program and acceptance of the P4Q program by providers. Following the present study, the online system was expanded in Iran's public health system for data collection and estimating the amount of incentive payments in P4Q program. Moreover, more improvements were achieved by linking the system to EMRs and also, providing automated feedback to providers about their own performance.

CONCLUSIONS

A web-based computerized system with the capability of linking medical record and also its ability to provide feedback to healthcare providers was identified as an appropriate method of data reporting in the P4Q program from the viewpoints of participants in this study.

Characterizing adults with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and intellectual disability: outcomes of a case-finding study

AIMS

To report the results of a case-finding study conducted during a feasibility trial of a supported self-management intervention for adults with mild to moderate intellectual disability and Type 2 diabetes mellitus, and to characterize the study sample in terms of diabetes control, health, and access to diabetes management services and support.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional case-finding study in the UK (March 2013 to June 2015), which recruited participants mainly through primary care settings. Data were obtained from medical records and during home visits.

RESULTS

Of the 325 referrals, 147 eligible individuals participated. The participants' mean (sd) HbA1c concentration was 55 (15) mmol/mol [7.1 (1.4)%] and the mean (sd) BMI was 32.9 (7.9) kg/m2 , with 20% of participants having a BMI >40 kg/m2 . Self-reported frequency of physical activity was low and 79% of participants reported comorbidity, for example, cardiovascular disease, in addition to Type 2 diabetes. The majority of participants (88%) had a formal or informal supporter involved in their diabetes care, but level and consistency of support varied greatly. Post hoc exploratory analyses showed a significant association between BMI and self-reported mood, satisfaction with diet and weight.

CONCLUSIONS

We found high obesity and low physical activity levels in people with intellectual disability and Type 2 diabetes. Glycaemic control was no worse than in the general Type 2 diabetes population. Increased risk of morbidity in this population is less likely to be attributable to poor glycaemic control and is probably related, at least in part, to greater prevalence of obesity and inactivity. More research, focused on weight management and increasing activity in this population, is warranted.

Assessing variability in compliance with recommendations given by the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) for patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care using electronic records. The APNA study

OBJECTIVE

Assess compliance with the IDF recommendations for patients with Diabetes Type2 (DM2), and its variability, by groups of doctors and nurses who provide primary care services in Navarre (Spain).

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGIES

A cross-sectional study of a population of 462,568 inhabitants, aged ≥18 years in 2013, attended by 381 units of doctor/nurse (quota). Clinical data were collected retrospectively through electronic records. Using cluster analysis, we identified two groups of units according to the score for each indicator. We calculated the Odds Ratio, adjusted for age sex, BMI, socioeconomic status and smoking, for complying with each recommendation whether a patient was treated by one of the quota from the highest score to the lowest. 30,312 patients with DM2 were identified: prevalence: 6.39%; coefficient of variation between UDN: 22.8%; biggest cluster 7.7% and smallest 5.3%; OR=1.54 (1.50-1.58). The HbA1c control at ≤8% was 82.8% (82.2-83.3) and >9% was 7.6% (7.3-8.0), with OR 1.79 (1.69-1.89) and 2.62 (2.36-2.91) respectively. Control of BP and LDL-C show significant differences between the clusters.

CONCLUSIONS

An important variability was identified according to the doctor treating patients. The average HbA1c control is acceptable being limited in BP and LDL-C.

Incentivised chronic disease management and the inverse equity hypothesis: findings from a longitudinal analysis of Scottish primary care practice-level data

BACKGROUND

The inverse equity hypothesis asserts that new health policies initially widen inequality, then attenuate inequalities over time. Since 2004, the UK's pay-for-performance scheme for chronic disease management (CDM) in primary care general practices (the Quality and Outcomes Framework) has permitted practices to except (exclude) patients from attending annual CDM reviews, without financial penalty. Informed dissent (ID) is one component of exception rates, applied to patients who have not attended due to refusal or non-response to invitations. 'Population achievement' describes the proportion receiving care, in relation to those eligible to receive it, including excepted patients. Examination of exception reporting (including ID) and population achievement enables the equity impact of the UK pay-for-performance contract to be assessed. We conducted a longitudinal analysis of practice-level rates and of predictors of ID, overall exceptions and population achievement for CDM to examine whether the inverse equity hypothesis holds true.

METHODS

We carried out a retrospective, longitudinal study using routine primary care data, analysed by multilevel logistic regression. Data were extracted from 793 practices (83% of Scottish general practices) serving 4.4 million patients across Scotland from 2010/2011 to 2012/2013, for 29 CDM indicators covering 11 incentivised diseases. This provided 68,991 observations, representing a total of 15 million opportunities for exception reporting.

RESULTS

Across all observations, the median overall exception reporting rate was 7.0% (7.04% in 2010-2011; 7.02% in 2011-2012 and 6.92% in 2012-2013). The median non-attendance rate due to ID was 0.9% (0.76% in 2010-2011; 0.88% in 2011-2012 and 0.96% in 2012-2013). Median population achievement was 83.5% (83.51% in 2010-2011; 83.41% in 2011-2012 and 83.63% in 2012-2013). The odds of ID reporting in 2012/2013 were 16.0% greater than in 2010/2011 (p < 0.001). Practices in Scotland's most deprived communities were twice as likely to report non-attendance due to ID (odds ratio 2.10, 95% confidence interval 1.83-2.40, p < 0.001) compared with those in the least deprived; rural practices reported lower levels of non-attendance due to ID. These predictors were also independently associated with overall exceptions. Rates of population achievement did not change over time, with higher levels (higher remuneration) associated with increased rates of overall and ID exception and more affluent practices.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-attendance for CDM due to ID has risen over time, and higher rates are seen in patients from practices located in disadvantaged areas. This suggests that CDM incentivisation does not conform to the inverse equity hypothesis, because inequalities are widening over time with lower uptake of anticipatory care health checks and CDM reviews noted among those most in need. Incentivised CDM needs to include incentives for engaging with the 'hard to reach' if inequalities in healthcare delivery are to be tackled.

Is the distribution of care quality provided under pay-for-performance equitable? Evidence from the Advancing Quality programme in England

BACKGROUND

The limited number of existing previous studies of the distribution of quality under NHS Pay-for-performance (P4P) by income deprivation have not analysed the relationship at the individual level and have been restricted to assessing P4P in the primary care setting. In this study, we set out to examine how achievement of P4P 'quality measures' for which NHS hospitals were paid was distributed by income deprivation.

METHODS

Design: Retrospective analysis of performance data reported by hospitals, examining how the probability of receiving 23 indicators varied by patients' area deprivation using logistic regression controlling for age and gender.

SAMPLE

We use anonymised observational data on 73,002 patients admitted to hospitals in the North West of England between October 2008 and March 2010 for the following five reasons: acute myocardial infarction; coronary artery bypass grafting; heart failure; hip and knee replacement; and pneumonia.

RESULTS

The relationship between quality and deprivation varies depending on the point of delivery in the treatment pathway, and on whether delivered for conditions in scheduled or unscheduled care. For diagnostic tests on arrival, receipt of quality was: pro-rich in scheduled care and pro-poor in unscheduled care. Receipt of quality was pro-poor for pre-surgery measures in scheduled care. Receipt of quality at discharge was pro-rich.

CONCLUSION

Unlike in primary care, in secondary care quality is not systemically distributed by income deprivation under P4P. Whilst improvements in health inequalities are important system objectives; they may not necessarily be achieved by the adoption of P4P schemes in hospitals.

Algorithms for the Capture and Adjudication of Prevalent and Incident Diabetes in UK Biobank

Objectives

UK Biobank is a UK-wide cohort of 502,655 people aged 40–69, recruited from National Health Service registrants between 2006–10, with healthcare data linkage. Type 2 diabetes is a key exposure and outcome. We developed algorithms to define prevalent and incident diabetes for UK Biobank. The algorithms will be implemented by UK Biobank and their results made available to researchers on request.

Methods

We used UK Biobank self-reported medical history and medication to assign prevalent diabetes and type, and tested this against linked primary and secondary care data in Welsh UK Biobank participants. Additionally, we derived and tested algorithms for incident diabetes using linked primary and secondary care data in the English Clinical Practice Research Datalink, and ran these on secondary care data in UK Biobank.

Results and Significance

For prevalent diabetes, 0.001% and 0.002% of people classified as “diabetes unlikely” in UK Biobank had evidence of diabetes in their primary or secondary care record respectively. Of those classified as “probable” type 2 diabetes, 75% and 96% had specific type 2 diabetes codes in their primary and secondary care records. For incidence, 95% of people with the type 2 diabetes-specific C10F Read code in primary care had corroborative evidence of diabetes from medications, blood testing or diabetes specific process of care codes. Only 41% of people identified with type 2 diabetes in primary care had secondary care evidence of type 2 diabetes. In contrast, of incident cases using ICD-10 type 2 diabetes specific codes in secondary care, 77% had corroborative evidence of diabetes in primary care. We suggest our definition of prevalent diabetes from UK Biobank baseline data has external validity, and recommend that specific primary care Read codes should be used for incident diabetes to ensure precision. Secondary care data should be used for incident diabetes with caution, as around half of all cases are missed, and a quarter have no corroborative evidence of diabetes in primary care.

Physical health indicators in major mental illness: analysis of QOF data across UK general practice

BACKGROUND

The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) has specific targets for body mass index (BMI) and blood pressure recording in major mental illness (MMI), diabetes, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Although aspects of MMI (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and related psychoses) are incentivised, barriers to care may occur.

AIM

To compare payment, population achievement, and exception rates for blood pressure and BMI recording in MMI relative to diabetes and CKD across the UK.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Analysis of 2012/2013 QOF data from 9731 UK general practices 2 years after the introduction of the mental health, BMI, and blood pressure QOF indicators.

METHOD

Payment, exception, and population achievement rates for the MMI and CKD blood pressure indicators and the MMI and diabetes BMI indicators were calculated and compared.

RESULTS

UK payment and population achievement rates for BMI recording for MMI were significantly lower than for diabetes (payment: 92.7% versus 95.5% and population achievement: 84.0% versus 92.5%, P<0.001) and exception rates were higher (8.1% versus 2.0%, P<0.001). For blood pressure recording, UK payment and population achievement rates were significantly lower for MMI than for CKD (94.1% versus 97.8% and 87.0% versus 97.1%, P<0.001), while exception rate was higher (6.5% versus 0.0%, P<0.001). This was observed for all countries. Compared with England, Northern Ireland had higher population achievement rates for both mental health indicators, whereas Scotland and Wales had lower rates. There were no cross-jurisdiction differences for CKD and diabetes.

CONCLUSION

Differences in payment, exception, and population achievement rates for blood pressure and BMI recording for MMI relative to CKD and diabetes were observed across the UK. These findings suggest potential inequalities in the monitoring of physical health in MMI within the UK primary care system.

Big Data and Health Care: Challenges and Opportunities for Coordinated Policy Development in the EU

Abstract-As global policy makers prioritize big data policy, it is important to try to outline expected outcomes vis-à-vis health sector objectives. We identify initiatives aimed at promoting the use of big data in European Union (EU) health care, highlight expected challenges, and use these to evaluate EU big data policy developments to the extent that they are able to advance health sector priorities. A comprehensive approach is used to capture and examine peer-reviewed and gray literature publications on the use of big data in global health systems. This approach involved electronic database and specialist website searching, as well as complementary use of search engines and qualitative inputs from key EU policy stakeholders. Ongoing health data initiatives revolve around data center development, confidentiality and security, e-health and m-health, and genomics and bioinformatics. The literature acknowledges several main challenges to the successful integration of big data in health care, classified as either ethical (confidentiality and data security, access to information) or technical (data reliability, interoperability, data management and governance). EU data policy has started to address these issues, though additional work remains. A larger outstanding challenge is the lack of a comprehensive health and research policy strategy for big data that targets sectoral objectives. It remains unclear how big data integration will affect the quality and performance of health care in the EU. The promises of big data are being eroded by a failure to develop a coherent approach to adequately address conceptual, ethical, and technical challenges pertaining to its use within EU health systems.

Health care utilization in older people with cardiovascular disease in China

BACKGROUND

Population is ageing rapidly and prevalence of cardiovascular diseases is increasing in China. This study aims to examine the patterns of outpatient and inpatient health care utilization across different demographic and socioeconomic groups in older people with cardiovascular disease in China.

METHODS

Data were from World Health Organization (WHO) Study on Global Aging and Adult Health (SAGE) Wave 1. Chinese older people aged over 50 years with cardiovascular disease were included in the analysis. Outpatient and inpatient care utilization rates were presented and compared by demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between socioeconomic factors and health care utilization.

RESULTS

In total, 4162 older people with cardiovascular disease in SAGE China Wave 1 were included in the analysis. 86.4% of them had health insurance. 54.9% of the patients received outpatient care and 17.7% received inpatient care over the past 12 months. Outpatient care utilization rate was significantly associated with age. Patients in older groups used more outpatient care than those in younger groups (p = 0.010). Inpatient care utilization rate peaked at 70-79 years group (23.2%), and then reduced to 17.5% in 80 years plus group. Rich patients used more outpatient service than the poorer (p < 0.001). No association was found between household wealth status and inpatient service utilization.

CONCLUSION

Within the context of high health insurance coverage in China, the pattern of outpatient care utilization differs from that of inpatient care utilization among older patients aged over 50 years old with cardiovascular disease. Patients tend to use more outpatient care as they became older. As for inpatient care, the oldest patients aged over 80 years use less inpatient care than the 70-79 group. Household economic status plays an important role in outpatient care utilization, but it shows no association with inpatient care utilization in Chinese older patients.

Does a local financial incentive scheme reduce inequalities in the delivery of clinical care in a socially deprived community? A longitudinal data analysis

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic deprivation is associated with inequalities in health care and outcomes. Despite concerns that the Quality and Outcomes Framework pay-for-performance scheme in the UK would exacerbate inequalities in primary care delivery, gaps closed over time. Local schemes were promoted as a means of improving clinical engagement by addressing local health priorities. We evaluated equity in achievement of target indicators and practice income for one local scheme.

METHODS

We undertook a longitudinal survey over four years of routinely recorded clinical data for all 83 primary care practices. Sixteen indicators were developed that covered five local clinical and public health priorities: weight management; alcohol consumption; learning disabilities; osteoporosis; and chlamydia screening. Clinical indicators were logit transformed from a percentage achievement scale and modelled allowing for clustering of repeated measures within practices. This enabled our study of target achievements over time with respect to deprivation. Practice income was also explored.

RESULTS

Higher practice deprivation was associated with poorer performance for five indicators: alcohol use registration (OR 0.97; 95 % confidence interval 0.96,0.99); recorded chlamydia test result (OR 0.97; 0.94,0.99); osteoporosis registration (OR 0.98; 0.97,0.99); registration of repeat prednisolone prescription (OR 0.98; 0.96,0.99); and prednisolone registration with record of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan/referral (OR 0.92; 0.86,0.97); practices in deprived areas performed better for one indicator (registration of osteoporotic fragility fracture (OR 1.26; 1.04,1.51). The deprivation-achievement gap widened for one indicator (registered females aged 65-74 with a fracture referred for a DEXA scan; OR 0.97; 0.95,0.99). Two other indicators indicated a similar trend over two years before being withdrawn (registration of fragility fracture and over-75 s with a fragility fracture assessed and treated for osteoporosis risk). For one indicator the deprivation-achievement gap reduced over time (repeat prednisolone prescription (OR 1.01; 1.01,1.01). Larger practices and those serving more affluent areas earned more income per patient than smaller practices and those serving more deprived areas (t = -3.99; p =0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Any gaps in achievement between practices were modest but mostly sustained or widened over the duration of the scheme. Given that financial rewards may not reflect the amount of work undertaken by practices serving more deprived patients, future pay-for-performance schemes also need to address fairness of rewards in relation to workload.

Impact of 'stretch' targets for cardiovascular disease management within a local pay-for-performance programme

Pay-for-performance programs are often aimed to improve the management of chronic diseases. We evaluate the impact of a local pay for performance programme (QOF+), which rewarded financially more ambitious quality targets (‘stretch targets’) than those used nationally in the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF). We focus on targets for intermediate outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease and diabetes. A difference-in-difference approach is used to compare practice level achievements before and after the introduction of the local pay for performance program. In addition, we analysed patient-level data on exception reporting and intermediate outcomes utilizing an interrupted time series analysis. The local pay for performance program led to significantly higher target achievements (hypertension: p-value <0.001, coronary heart disease: p-values <0.001, diabetes: p-values <0.061, stroke: p-values <0.003). However, the increase was driven by higher rates of exception reporting (hypertension: p-value <0.001, coronary heart disease: p-values <0.03, diabetes: p-values <0.05) in patients with all conditions except for stroke. Exception reporting allows practitioners to exclude patients from target calculations if certain criteria are met, e.g. informed dissent of the patient for treatment. There were no statistically significant improvements in mean blood pressure, cholesterol or HbA1c levels. Thus, achievement of higher payment thresholds in the local pay for performance scheme was mainly attributed to increased exception reporting by practices with no discernable improvements in overall clinical quality. Hence, active monitoring of exception reporting should be considered when setting more ambitious quality targets. More generally, the study suggests a trade-off between additional incentive for better care and monitoring costs.

[Compliance with process indicators in people with type 2 diabetes and linking incentives in Primary Care]

Objetivo

Los programas de pago por desempeño para mejorar la calidad de la atención sanitaria se están extendiendo de forma progresiva, en particular para en Atención Primaria. Nuestro objetivo fue explorar la relación entre el grado de cumplimiento de los indicadores de proceso (IPr) de la diabetes mellitus tipo 2 (DM2) en Atención Primaria y la vinculación a incentivos económicos.

Diseño

Estudio descriptivo observacional, descriptivo y transversal.

Emplazamiento

Seis centros de salud del Distrito Aljarafe, Sevilla, seleccionados de forma aleatoria y estratificada por tamaño poblacional.

Participantes

De un total de 3.647 sujetos incluidos en el Proceso Asistencial Integrado de DM2 durante el 2008, se incluyó a 366 pacientes, según cálculo de tamaño muestral, mediante muestreo aleatorio estratificado.

Mediciones

IPr: exploración de fondo de ojo y pies, hemoglobina glucosilada (HbA1c), perfil lipídico, microalbuminuria y electrocardiograma. Variables potencialmente confusoras: edad, género, característica de zona de residencia en pacientes y variables de los médicos.

Resultados

La edad media fue de 66,36 (desviación estándar –DE– 11,56 años); el 48,9% eran mujeres. Los IPr con mejor cumplimiento fueron la exploración de pies, HbA1c y perfil lipídico (59,6, 44,3 y 44, respectivamente). El 2,7% de los pacientes presentaban cumplimiento simultáneo de los 6 IPr y el 11,74% de los 3 IPr vinculados a incentivos. El cumplimiento de IPr vinculado y no a incentivos mostró asociación significativa (p = 0,001).

Conclusiones

El cumplimiento de los IPr para el cribado de complicaciones crónicas de la DM2 es en su mayoría bajo, aunque este fue superior en los indicadores vinculados a incentivos.

Measuring Diabetes Care Performance Using Electronic Health Record Data: The Impact of Diabetes Definitions on Performance Measure Outcomes

The objective was to examine the use of electronic health record (EHR) data for diabetes performance measurement. Data were extracted from the EHR of a health system to identify patients with diabetes using 8 different EHR data-based methods of identification. These EHR-based methods were compared to the gold standard of a manual medical record review. The study team then assessed whether the method of identifying patients with diabetes could affect performance measurement scores. The sensitivity of the 8 EHR-based methods of identifying patients with diabetes ranged from moderate to high. The use of certain data elements in the EHR to identify patients with diabetes selectively identified those who had better performance measures. Diabetes performance measures are influenced by the data elements used to identify patients. As EHR data are used increasingly to measure performance, continuing to improve our understanding of how EHR data are collected and used will be critical.

Assessment of primary health care received by the elderly and health related quality of life: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Population aging leads to increased burden of chronic diseases and demand in public health. This study aimed to assess whether the score of Primary Health Care (PHC) is associated with a) the model of care - Family Health Strategy (FHS) vs. traditional care model (the Basic Health Units; BHU); b) morbid conditions such as - hypertension, diabetes mellitus, mental disorders, chronic pain, obesity and central obesity; c) quality of life in elderly individuals who received care in those units.

METHODS

A survey was conducted among the elderly between August 2010 and August 2011, in Ilheus, Bahia. We interviewed elderly patients - 60 years or older - who consulted at BHU or FHS units in that day or participated in a group activity, and those who were visited at home by the staff of PHC, selected through a random sample. Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, services' attainment of primary care attributes, health problems and quality of life were investigated. The Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) was used to assess quality of life and PCATool to generate PHC scores. In addition, weight, height and waist circumference were measured. Trained research assistants, under supervision performed the data collection.

RESULTS

A total of 511 elderly individuals were identified, two declined to participate, resulting in 509 individuals interviewed. The health care provided by the FHS has higher attainment of PHC attributes, in comparison to the BHU, resulting in lower prevalence of score below six. Except for hypertension and cardiovascular disease, other chronic problems were not independently associated with low scores in PHC. It was observed an independent and positive association between PHC score and the mental component of quality of life and an inverse association with the physical component.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed higher PHC attributes attainment in units with FHS, regardless of the health problem. The degree of orientation to PHC increased the mental component score of quality of life.

Pay-for-performance: impact on diabetes

Pay-for-performance schemes explicitly link provider remuneration to the quality of care provided, with the aims of modifying provider behavior and improving patient outcomes. If successful, pay-for-performance schemes could drive improvements in quality and efficiency of care. However, financial incentives could also erode providers' intrinsic motivation, narrow their focus, promote unethical behavior, and ultimately increase health care inequalities. Evidence from schemes implemented to date suggests that carefully designed pay-for-performance schemes that align sufficient rewards with clinical priorities can produce modest but significant improvements in processes of diabetic care and intermediate outcomes. There is limited evidence, however, on whether improvements in processes of care result in improved outcomes, in terms of patient satisfaction, reduced complications, and greater longevity. The lack of adequate control groups has limited research findings to date, and more robust studies are needed to explore both the potential long-term benefits of pay-for-performance schemes and their unintended consequences.

Health equity audits in general practice: a strategy to reduce health inequalities

BACKGROUND

This quality improvement project was set in Tower Hamlets, east London, with the aim of reducing health inequalities by ethnicity, age and gender in the management of three common chronic diseases.

METHODS

Routinely collected clinical data were extracted from practice computer systems using Morbidity Information Query and Export Syntax (MIQUEST) and Egton Medical Information Systems (EMIS) Web, between 2007 and 2010. Health equity audits for 38 practices in Tower Hamlets primary care trust (PCT) were constructed to cover key process and outcome measures for each of the three major chronic diseases: coronary heart disease (CHD), type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The equity audit was disseminated to practices along with facilitation sessions.

RESULTS

We show evidence of baseline inequalities in each condition across the three east London PCTs. The intervention tracked four key indicators (cholesterol levels in CHD, blood pressure and haemoglobin A1c levels in diabetes and % smoking in COPD). Performance for physician-driven interventions improved, but smoking rates remained static. All ethnic groups showed improvement, but there was no evidence of a reduction in differences between ethnic groups. Reductions in gender and age group differences were noted in diabetes and CHD.

CONCLUSIONS

Using routine clinical data, it is possible to develop practice-level health equity reports. These can unmask previously hidden inequalities between groups, and promote discussion with practice teams to stimulate strategies for improvements in performance. Steady improvements in chronic disease management were observed, however, systematic differences between ethnic groups remain. We are not able to attribute observed changes to the audits. These reports illustrate the importance of collecting ethnicity data at practice level. Tools such as this audit can be adapted to monitor inequalities in primary care settings.

Payment for performance in the Family Health Programme: lessons from the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework

OBJECTIVE: Payment for performance financial incentive schemes reward doctors based on the quality and the outcomes of their treatment. In Brazil, the Ministry of Health is looking to scale up its use in public hospitals and some municipalities are developing payment for performance schemes even for the Family Health Programme. In this article the Quality and Outcomes Framework used in the UK since 2004 is discussed, as well as its experience to elaborate some important lessons that Brazilian municipalities should consider before embarking on payment for performance scheme in primary care settings.

Exempting dissenting patients from pay for performance schemes: retrospective analysis of exception reporting in the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework

OBJECTIVE

To examine the reasons why practices exempt patients from the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework pay for performance scheme (exception reporting) and to identify the characteristics of general practices associated with informed dissent.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Data for 2008-9 extracted from the clinical computing systems of general practices in England.

PARTICIPANTS

8229 English family practices.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rates of exception reporting for 37 clinical quality indicators, associations of patient and general practice factors with exception rates, and financial gain for practices relating to their use of exception reporting.

RESULTS

The median rate of exception reporting was 2.7% (interquartile range 1.9-3.9%) overall and 0.44% (0.14-1.1%) for informed dissent, but variation in rates was wide between practices and across indicators. Common reasons for exception reporting were logistical (40.6% of exceptions), clinical contraindication (18.7%), and patient informed dissent (30.1%). Higher rates of informed dissent were associated with: higher numbers of registered patients, higher levels of local area deprivation, and failure of the practice to secure maximum remuneration in the previous year. Exception reporting increased the cost of the scheme by £30,844,500 (€36,877,700; $49,053,200) (£0.58 per patient), with two indicators accounting for a quarter of this additional cost.

CONCLUSIONS

The provision to exception report enables practices to exempt dissenting patients without being financially penalised. Relatively few patients were excluded for informed dissent, however, suggesting that the incentivised activities were broadly acceptable to patients.

Using routinely gathered data to empower locally led health improvements

Data are routinely used throughout the NHS to report on and monitor performance. For example, detailed information regarding hospital episodes is reported via the Secondary Use Services (SUS) programme. Local commissioners use this data to monitor hospital contracts. In primary care, data such as glycaemic control of diabetes patients is extracted from general practice clinical systems to calculate practice payments for the 'Quality and Outcomes Framework' (QOF). We suggest that this routinely gathered data should also be used to help clusters of practices to learn from locally led innovation and to motivate long-term partnerships for interorganisational health improvement. Following the recent NHS reforms, the number of data sources that could facilitate this is likely to increase in size, variety and complexity. In this paper, we describe some of the existing data sources that could be used to do this; we also describe some of the dangers of using data in this way, and our conclusions about the best way forward.

Methods and tools for geographical mapping and analysis in primary health care

AIM

The purpose of this paper is to review methods and tools for mapping, visualising and exploring geographic information to aid in primary health care (PHC) research and development.

BACKGROUND

Mapping and spatial analysis of indicators of locality health profiles and healthcare needs assessment are well-established facets of health services research and development. However, while there are a range of different methods and tools used for these purposes, non-specialists responsible for managing the use of such information systems may find knowing where to start and what can be done a relatively steep learning curve. In this review, health and sociodemographic datasets are used to illustrate some key methods, tools and organisational issues, and builds upon two recent reviews in this journal, respectively, focusing on geographic data sources and geographic concepts. Those familiar with mapping and spatial analysis should find this a useful review of current matters.

METHOD

A thematic review is presented with illustrative case studies relevant to PHC. It begins with a section on visualising and interpreting geographic information. This is followed by a section critiquing analytical methods. Consideration is given to software and deployment issues in a third section. Content is based on domain knowledge of the authors as a team of geographic information scientists and a public health practitioner working in tandem, with its scope restricted to routine applications of mapping and analysis. Advanced techniques such as spatio-temporal modelling are not considered, neither are methodological technicalities, although guidance on further reading is provided.

SUMMARY

Geographical perspectives are now playing a significant role in PHC delivery, and for those engaged in informatics and/or managing population-level care, understanding key geographic information systems methods and terminologies are important as is gaining greater familiarity with institutional aspects of implementation.

The equity dimension in evaluations of the quality and outcomes framework: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pay-for-performance systems raise concerns regarding inequity in health care because providers might select patients for whom targets can easily be reached. This paper aims to describe the evolution of pre-existing (in)equity in health care in the period after the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) in the UK and to describe (in)equities in exception reporting. In this evaluation, a theory-based framework conceptualising equity in terms of equal access, equal treatment and equal treatment outcomes for people in equal need is used to guide the work.

METHODS

A systematic MEDLINE and Econlit search identified 317 studies. Of these, 290 were excluded because they were not related to the evaluation of QOF, they lacked an equity dimension in the evaluation, their qualitative research focused on experiences or on the nature of the consultation, or unsuitable methodology was used to pronounce upon equity after the introduction of QOF.

RESULTS

None of the publications (n = 27) assessed equity in access to health care. Concerning equity in treatment and (intermediate) treatment outcomes, overall quality scores generally improved. For the majority of the observed indicators, all citizens benefit from this improvement, yet the extent to which different patient groups benefit tends to vary and to be highly dependent on the type and complexity of the indicator(s) under study, the observed patient group(s) and the characteristics of the study. In general, the introduction of QOF was favourable for the aged and for males. Total QOF scores did not seem to vary according to ethnicity. For deprivation, small but significant residual differences were observed after the introduction of QOF favouring less deprived groups. These differences are mainly due to differences at the practice level. The variance in exception reporting according to gender and socio-economic position is low.

CONCLUSIONS

Although QOF seems not to be socially selective at first glance, this does not mean QOF does not contribute to the inverse care law. Introducing different targets for specific patient groups and including appropriate, non-disease specific and patient-centred indicators that grasp the complexity of primary care might refine the equity dimension of the evaluation of QOF. Also, information on the actual uptake of care, information at the patient level and monitoring of individuals' health care utilisation tracks could make large contributions to an in-depth evaluation. Finally, evaluating pay-for-quality initiatives in a broader health systems impact assessment strategy with equity as a full assessment criterion is of utmost importance.

Exclusion of patients from quality measurement of diabetes care in the UK pay-for-performance programme

BACKGROUND

We examined associations between patient and practice characteristics and exclusions from quality indicators for diabetes during the first 3 years of the Quality and Outcomes Framework, a major pay-for-performance scheme in the UK.

METHODS

Three cross-sectional analyses, conducted using data from the electronic medical records of all patients with diabetes registered in 23 general practices in Brent, North West London between 2004/2005 and 2006/2007. Patterns of exclusions were examined for three intermediate outcome indicators.

RESULTS

Excluded patients were less likely to achieve treatment targets for HbA(1c) (2004/2005, 2006/2007), blood pressure (2005/2006, 2006/2007) and cholesterol (2005/2006). Black and South Asian patients were more likely to be excluded from the HbA(1c) indicator than White patients [adjusted odds ratio = 1.64 (1.17-2.29) in 2005/2006]. Patients diagnosed with diabetes duration of > 10 years [adjusted odds ratio = 2.01 (1.65-2.45) for HbA(1c) in 2006-2007] and those with co-morbidities (adjusted odds ratio, ≥ 3 co-morbidities compared with no co-morbidity for HbA(1c) adjusted odds ratio = 1.90 (1.24-2.90) in 2004/2005] were more likely to be excluded. Larger practices excluded more patients from the HbA(1c) indicator [adjusted odds ratio, practice ≥ 7000 compared with < 3000, 3.52 (2.35-5.27) in 2005-2006]. More deprived practices consistently excluded more patients from all indicators, whilst in 2007 older patients were excluded to a larger degree [adjusted odds ratio = 2.52 (1.21-5.28) ≥ 75 compared with 18-44 for blood pressure control].

CONCLUSIONS

Patients excluded from pay-for-performance programmes may be less likely to achieve treatment goals and disproportionately come from disadvantaged groups. Permitting physicians to exclude patients from pay-for-performance programmes may worsen health disparities.

Value for money and the Quality and Outcomes Framework in primary care in the UK NHS

BACKGROUND

The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) is a pioneering attempt to improve the quality of primary care in the UK through the use of financial rewards. Despite its achievements, there are concerns that the QOF may offer poor value for money.

AIM

To assess the cost-effectiveness of QOF payments.

DESIGN OF STUDY

Economic analysis.

SETTING

England, UK.

METHOD

Cost-effectiveness evidence was identified for a subset of nine QOF indicators with a direct therapeutic impact. These data were then applied to an analytic framework to determine the conditions under which QOF payments would be cost-effective. This framework was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of QOF payments by modelling the incentive structure using cost-effectiveness thresholds of 20 000 and 30 000 UK pounds per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, to represent good value to the NHS. It used 2004/2005 data on the QOF performance of all English primary care practices.

RESULTS

Average indicator payments ranged from 0.63 to 40.61 UK pounds per patient, and the percentage of eligible patients treated ranged from 63% to 90%. The proportional changes required for QOF payments to be cost-effective varied widely between the indicators. Although most indicators required only a fraction of a 1% change to be cost-effective, for some indicators improvements in performance of around 20% were needed.

CONCLUSION

For most indicators that can be assessed, QOF incentive payments are likely to be a cost-effective use of resources for a high proportion of primary care practices, even if the QOF achieves only modest improvements in care. However, only a small subset of the indicators has been considered, and no account has been taken of the costs of administering the QOF scheme.

The unintended consequence of diabetes mellitus pay-for-performance (P4P) program in Taiwan: are patients with more comorbidities or more severe conditions likely to be excluded from the P4P program?

OBJECTIVE

Taiwan has instituted a pay-for-performance (P4P) program for diabetes mellitus (DM) patients that rewards doctors based in part on outcomes for their DM patients. Doctors are permitted to choose which of their DM patients are included in the P4P program. We test whether seriously ill DM patients are disproportionately excluded from the P4P program.

DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING

This study utilizes data from the National Health Insurance (NHI) database in Taiwan for the period of January 2007 to December 2007. Our sample includes 146,481 DM-P4P patients (16.56 percent of the total) and 737,971 non-DM-P4P patients.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We use logistic and multilevel models to estimate the effects of patient and hospital characteristics on P4P selection.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The results show that older patients and patients with more comorbidities or more severe conditions are prone to be excluded from P4P programs.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that DM patients are disproportionately excluded from P4P programs. Our results point to the importance of mandated participation and risk adjustment measures in P4P programs.

Systematic review: Effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care

BACKGROUND

Pay-for-performance (P4P) is one of the primary tools used to support healthcare delivery reform. Substantial heterogeneity exists in the development and implementation of P4P in health care and its effects. This paper summarizes evidence, obtained from studies published between January 1990 and July 2009, concerning P4P effects, as well as evidence on the impact of design choices and contextual mediators on these effects. Effect domains include clinical effectiveness, access and equity, coordination and continuity, patient-centeredness, and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

The systematic review made use of electronic database searching, reference screening, forward citation tracking and expert consultation. The following databases were searched: Cochrane Library, EconLit, Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, and Web of Science. Studies that evaluate P4P effects in primary care or acute hospital care medicine were included. Papers concerning other target groups or settings, having no empirical evaluation design or not complying with the P4P definition were excluded. According to study design nine validated quality appraisal tools and reporting statements were applied. Data were extracted and summarized into evidence tables independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-eight evaluation studies provide a large body of evidence -to be interpreted with caution- concerning the effects of P4P on clinical effectiveness and equity of care. However, less evidence on the impact on coordination, continuity, patient-centeredness and cost-effectiveness was found. P4P effects can be judged to be encouraging or disappointing, depending on the primary mission of the P4P program: supporting minimal quality standards and/or boosting quality improvement. Moreover, the effects of P4P interventions varied according to design choices and characteristics of the context in which it was introduced.Future P4P programs should (1) select and define P4P targets on the basis of baseline room for improvement, (2) make use of process and (intermediary) outcome indicators as target measures, (3) involve stakeholders and communicate information about the programs thoroughly and directly, (4) implement a uniform P4P design across payers, (5) focus on both quality improvement and achievement, and (6) distribute incentives to the individual and/or team level.

CONCLUSIONS

P4P programs result in the full spectrum of possible effects for specific targets, from absent or negligible to strongly beneficial. Based on the evidence the review has provided further indications on how effect findings are likely to relate to P4P design choices and context. The provided best practice hypotheses should be tested in future research.

Impact of pay for performance on inequalities in health care: systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of pay for performance programmes on inequalities in the quality of health care in relation to age, sex, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

METHODS

Systematic search and appraisal of experimental or observational studies that assessed quantitatively the impact of a monetary incentive on health care inequalities. We searched published articles in English identified in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane databases.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were identified, 20 of which were conducted in the United Kingdom and examined the impact of the Quality and Outcomes Framework. Sixteen studies used practice level data rather than patient level data. Socioeconomic status was the most frequently examined inequality; age, sex and ethnic inequalities were less frequently assessed. There was some weak evidence that the use of financial incentives reduced inequalities in chronic disease management between socioeconomic groups. Inequalities in chronic disease management between age, sex and ethnic groups persisted after the use of such incentives.

CONCLUSION

Inequalities in chronic disease management have largely persisted after the introduction of the Quality and Outcome Framework. Pay for performance programmes should be designed to reduce inequalities as well as improve the overall quality of care.

Estimating prevalence of coronary heart disease for small areas using collateral indicators of morbidity

Different indicators of morbidity for chronic disease may not necessarily be available at a disaggregated spatial scale (e.g., for small areas with populations under 10 thousand). Instead certain indicators may only be available at a more highly aggregated spatial scale; for example, deaths may be recorded for small areas, but disease prevalence only at a considerably higher spatial scale. Nevertheless prevalence estimates at small area level are important for assessing health need. An instance is provided by England where deaths and hospital admissions for coronary heart disease are available for small areas known as wards, but prevalence is only available for relatively large health authority areas. To estimate CHD prevalence at small area level in such a situation, a shared random effect method is proposed that pools information regarding spatial morbidity contrasts over different indicators (deaths, hospitalizations, prevalence). The shared random effect approach also incorporates differences between small areas in known risk factors (e.g., income, ethnic structure). A Poisson-multinomial equivalence may be used to ensure small area prevalence estimates sum to the known higher area total. An illustration is provided by data for London using hospital admissions and CHD deaths at ward level, together with CHD prevalence totals for considerably larger local health authority areas. The shared random effect involved a spatially correlated common factor, that accounts for clustering in latent risk factors, and also provides a summary measure of small area CHD morbidity.

Effect of financial incentives on inequalities in the delivery of primary clinical care in England: analysis of clinical activity indicators for the quality and outcomes framework

BACKGROUND

The quality and outcomes framework is a financial incentive scheme that remunerates general practices in the UK for their performance against a set of quality indicators. Incentive schemes can increase inequalities in the delivery of care if practices in affluent areas are more able to respond to the incentives than are those in deprived areas. We examined the relation between socioeconomic inequalities and delivered quality of clinical care in the first 3 years of this scheme.

METHODS

We analysed data extracted automatically from clinical computing systems for 7637 general practices in England, data from the UK census, and data for characteristics of practices and patients from the 2006 general medical statistics database. Practices were grouped into equal-sized quintiles on the basis of area deprivation in their locality. We calculated overall levels of achievement, defined as the proportion of patients who were deemed eligible by the practices for whom the targets were achieved, for 48 clinical activity indicators during the first 3 years of the incentive scheme (from 2004-05 to 2006-07).

FINDINGS

Median overall reported achievement was 85.1% (IQR 79.0-89.1) in year 1, 89.3% (86.0-91.5) in year 2, and 90.8% (88.5-92.6) in year 3. In year 1, area deprivation was associated with lower levels of achievement, with median achievement ranging from 86.8% (82.2-89.6) for quintile 1 (least deprived) to 82.8% (75.2-87.8) for quintile 5 (most deprived). Between years 1 and 3, median achievement increased by 4.4% for quintile 1 and by 7.6% for quintile 5, and the gap in median achievement narrowed from 4.0% to 0.8% during this period. Increase in achievement during this time was inversely associated with practice performance in previous years (p<0.0001), but was not associated with area deprivation (p=0.062).

INTERPRETATION

Our results suggest that financial incentive schemes have the potential to make a substantial contribution to the reduction of inequalities in the delivery of clinical care related to area deprivation.

Exclusion of patients from pay-for-performance targets by English physicians

BACKGROUND

In the English pay-for-performance program, physicians use a range of criteria to exclude individual patients from the quality calculations that determine their pay. This process, which is called exception reporting, is intended to safeguard patients against inappropriate treatment by physicians seeking to maximize their income. However, exception reporting may allow physicians to inappropriately exclude patients for whom targets have been missed (a practice known as gaming).

METHODS

We analyzed data extracted automatically from clinical computing systems for 8105 family practices in England (96% of all practices), data from the U.K. Census, and data on practice characteristics from the U.K. Department of Health. We determined the rate of exception reporting for 65 clinical activities and the association between this rate and the characteristics of patients and medical practices.

RESULTS

From April 2005 through March 2006, physicians excluded a median of 5.3% of patients (interquartile range, 4.0 to 6.9) from the quality calculations. Physicians were most likely to exclude patients from indicators that were related to providing treatments and achieving target levels of intermediate outcomes; they were least likely to exclude patients from indicators that were related to routine checks and measurements and to offers of treatment. The characteristics of patients and practices explained only 2.7% of the variance in exception reporting. We estimate that exception reporting accounted for approximately 1.5% of the cost of the pay-for-performance program.

CONCLUSIONS

Exception reporting brings substantial benefits to pay-for-performance programs, providing that the process is used appropriately. In England, rates of exception reporting have generally been low, with little evidence of widespread gaming.

"Mind the gap!" Evaluation of the performance gap attributable to exception reporting and target thresholds in the new GMS contract: National database analysis

BACKGROUND

The 2003 revision of the UK GMS contract rewards general practices for performance against clinical quality indicators. Practices can exempt patients from treatment, and can receive maximum payment for less than full coverage of eligible patients. This paper aims to estimate the gap between the percentage of maximum incentive gained and the percentage of patients receiving indicated care (the pay-performance gap), and to estimate how much of the gap is attributable respectively to thresholds and to exception reporting.

METHODS

Analysis of Quality Outcomes Framework data in the National Primary Care Database and exception reporting data from the Information Centre from 8407 practices in England in 2005 - 6. The main outcome measures were the gap between the percentage of maximum incentive gained and the percentage of patients receiving indicated care at the practice level, both for individual indicators and a combined composite score. An additional outcome was the percentage of that gap attributable respectively to exception reporting and maximum threshold targets set at less than 100%.

RESULTS

The mean pay-performance gap for the 65 aggregated clinical indicators was 13.3% (range 2.9% to 48%). 52% of this gap (6.9% of eligible patients) is attributable to thresholds being set at less than 100%, and 48% to patients being exception reported. The gap was greater than 25% in 9 indicators: beta blockers and cholesterol control in heart disease; cholesterol control in stroke; influenza immunization in asthma; blood pressure, sugar and cholesterol control in diabetes; seizures in epilepsy and treatment of hypertension.

CONCLUSION

Threshold targets and exception reporting introduce an incentive ceiling, which substantially reduces the percentage of eligible patients that UK practices need to treat in order to receive maximum incentive payments for delivering that care. There are good clinical reasons for exception reporting, but after unsuitable patients have been exempted from treatment, there is no reason why all maximum thresholds should not be 100%, whilst retaining the current lower thresholds to provide incentives for lower performing practices.

Effectiveness of the diabetes education and self management for ongoing and newly diagnosed (DESMOND) programme for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a structured group education programme on biomedical, psychosocial, and lifestyle measures in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN

Multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care with randomisation at practice level.

SETTING

207 general practices in 13 primary care sites in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

824 adults (55% men, mean age 59.5 years).

INTERVENTION

A structured group education programme for six hours delivered in the community by two trained healthcare professional educators compared with usual care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Haemoglobin A(1c) levels, blood pressure, weight, blood lipid levels, smoking status, physical activity, quality of life, beliefs about illness, depression, and emotional impact of diabetes at baseline and up to 12 months.

MAIN RESULTS

Haemoglobin A(1c) levels at 12 months had decreased by 1.49% in the intervention group compared with 1.21% in the control group. After adjusting for baseline and cluster, the difference was not significant: 0.05% (95% confidence interval -0.10% to 0.20%). The intervention group showed a greater weight loss: -2.98 kg (95% confidence interval -3.54 to -2.41) compared with 1.86 kg (-2.44 to -1.28), P=0.027 at 12 months. The odds of not smoking were 3.56 (95% confidence interval 1.11 to 11.45), P=0.033 higher in the intervention group at 12 months. The intervention group showed significantly greater changes in illness belief scores (P=0.001); directions of change were positive indicating greater understanding of diabetes. The intervention group had a lower depression score at 12 months: mean difference was -0.50 (95% confidence interval -0.96 to -0.04); P=0.032. A positive association was found between change in perceived personal responsibility and weight loss at 12 months (beta=0.12; P=0.008).

CONCLUSION

A structured group education programme for patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes resulted in greater improvements in weight loss and smoking cessation and positive improvements in beliefs about illness but no difference in haemoglobin A(1c) levels up to 12 months after diagnosis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17844016 [controlled-trials.com].

Effectiveness of the diabetes education and self management for ongoing and newly diagnosed (DESMOND) programme for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a structured group education programme on biomedical, psychosocial, and lifestyle measures in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN

Multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care with randomisation at practice level.

SETTING

207 general practices in 13 primary care sites in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

824 adults (55% men, mean age 59.5 years).

INTERVENTION

A structured group education programme for six hours delivered in the community by two trained healthcare professional educators compared with usual care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Haemoglobin A(1c) levels, blood pressure, weight, blood lipid levels, smoking status, physical activity, quality of life, beliefs about illness, depression, and emotional impact of diabetes at baseline and up to 12 months.

MAIN RESULTS

Haemoglobin A(1c) levels at 12 months had decreased by 1.49% in the intervention group compared with 1.21% in the control group. After adjusting for baseline and cluster, the difference was not significant: 0.05% (95% confidence interval -0.10% to 0.20%). The intervention group showed a greater weight loss: -2.98 kg (95% confidence interval -3.54 to -2.41) compared with 1.86 kg (-2.44 to -1.28), P=0.027 at 12 months. The odds of not smoking were 3.56 (95% confidence interval 1.11 to 11.45), P=0.033 higher in the intervention group at 12 months. The intervention group showed significantly greater changes in illness belief scores (P=0.001); directions of change were positive indicating greater understanding of diabetes. The intervention group had a lower depression score at 12 months: mean difference was -0.50 (95% confidence interval -0.96 to -0.04); P=0.032. A positive association was found between change in perceived personal responsibility and weight loss at 12 months (beta=0.12; P=0.008).

CONCLUSION

A structured group education programme for patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes resulted in greater improvements in weight loss and smoking cessation and positive improvements in beliefs about illness but no difference in haemoglobin A(1c) levels up to 12 months after diagnosis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17844016 [controlled-trials.com].

Effectiveness of the diabetes education and self management for ongoing and newly diagnosed (DESMOND) programme for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a structured group education programme on biomedical, psychosocial, and lifestyle measures in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN

Multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care with randomisation at practice level.

SETTING

207 general practices in 13 primary care sites in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

824 adults (55% men, mean age 59.5 years).

INTERVENTION

A structured group education programme for six hours delivered in the community by two trained healthcare professional educators compared with usual care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Haemoglobin A(1c) levels, blood pressure, weight, blood lipid levels, smoking status, physical activity, quality of life, beliefs about illness, depression, and emotional impact of diabetes at baseline and up to 12 months.

MAIN RESULTS

Haemoglobin A(1c) levels at 12 months had decreased by 1.49% in the intervention group compared with 1.21% in the control group. After adjusting for baseline and cluster, the difference was not significant: 0.05% (95% confidence interval -0.10% to 0.20%). The intervention group showed a greater weight loss: -2.98 kg (95% confidence interval -3.54 to -2.41) compared with 1.86 kg (-2.44 to -1.28), P=0.027 at 12 months. The odds of not smoking were 3.56 (95% confidence interval 1.11 to 11.45), P=0.033 higher in the intervention group at 12 months. The intervention group showed significantly greater changes in illness belief scores (P=0.001); directions of change were positive indicating greater understanding of diabetes. The intervention group had a lower depression score at 12 months: mean difference was -0.50 (95% confidence interval -0.96 to -0.04); P=0.032. A positive association was found between change in perceived personal responsibility and weight loss at 12 months (beta=0.12; P=0.008).

CONCLUSION

A structured group education programme for patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes resulted in greater improvements in weight loss and smoking cessation and positive improvements in beliefs about illness but no difference in haemoglobin A(1c) levels up to 12 months after diagnosis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17844016 [controlled-trials.com].

The delivery and organization of public health in England: setting the research agenda

The publication of Best Research for Best Health highlighted the need for the NHS Service and Delivery Organisation (SDO) Programme to develop a programme of research on public health service delivery and organization. This paper reviews the need for this research by reviewing recent policy documents and public health research activity. The paper outlines the role of the SDO Programme in relation to other current developments and discusses how these respond to the need to develop research on public health and what the research priorities are.

Quality of diabetes care in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: cross-sectional study

AIMS

To determine whether patients with severe mental illness receive poorer health care for diabetes than patients without.

METHODS

This population-based cross-sectional survey used electronic general practice records from 481 UK general practices contributing to the QRESEARCH database. The records of 11 043 patients with diabetes, drawn from a database population of over 9 million patients, were extracted. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios were calculated using unconditional logistic regression for each of 17 quality indicators for diabetes care from the new General Medical Services contract for general practitioners.

RESULTS

The presence of severe mental illness did not reduce the quality of care received; the only significant difference between groups showed that such patients were more likely to have glycated haemoglobin < 7.5%[adjusted odds ratio = 1.45 (99% confidence interval 1.20-1.76)]. Increasing age was associated with better care [adjusted odds ratios from 1.06 (1.02-1.11) to 1.61 (1.52-1.70)], but other confounding variables had no consistent effect across indicators. Overall, performance against government targets was good.

CONCLUSIONS

The hypothesis of poorer diabetes care for those with severe mental illness is disproved, perhaps surprisingly, in the light of other recent UK studies showing inequalities in care for the mentally ill. The study does not reveal who is providing this good care (general practitioners, psychiatrists or diabetologists) or take account of the estimated 600 000 people in the UK with undiagnosed diabetes.

Risk factor measurement quality in primary care routine data was variable but nondifferential between individuals

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively assess the quality of cardiovascular disease risk factor measurements in routinely collected data and to examine whether there are systematic differences in measurement quality between individuals of different socioeconomic status, and changes in measurement quality over time.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Comparison of last digit preference in risk factor measurement between a "routine" data set (related to a primary care-based UK cardiovascular risk factor screening programme) and relevant prospective epidemiological surveys (Health Survey for England [HSE] and WHO MONICA). For the routine data set, the records of 37,161 women and 33,977 men aged 35-60 years with a first screening episode during the 11-year period 1989-1999 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Last digits of height, weight, and total cholesterol measurements in the routine data set did not exhibit a digit preference pattern, although the degree of random measurement error was greater compared with epidemiological survey data. The last digits of systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) measurements exhibited a strong last digit preference pattern for "0"-comprising 63.1% and 67.3% of all observations in men and women, respectively. Except for diastolic BP in men, last digit distribution patterns were not associated with participant's socioeconomic status and showed no change over time.

CONCLUSION

It may be feasible to study changes over time in cardiovascular disease risk factor levels in different socioeconomic groups using routine data sets; however, prior critical examination of measurement quality is necessary.

Are different groups of patients with stroke more likely to be excluded from the new UK general medical services contract? A cross-sectional retrospective analysis of a large primary care population

BACKGROUND

In April 2004, an incentive based contract was introduced to UK primary care. An important element of the new contract is the ability to exclude individuals from quality indicators for a variety of reasons (known as 'exception reporting'). Exception of patients with stroke or TIA from the recording and achievement of quality indicators may have important consequences in terms of stroke recurrence and mortality.

METHODS

A cross-sectional retrospective analysis of anonymised patient data was performed using 312 Scottish primary care practices.

RESULTS

Patients recorded as unsuitable for inclusion in the contract were more likely to be female (odds ratio (OR) 1.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36-1.68), older (>75 years:OR 3.15, 95%CI 2.69-3.69), and have dementia (OR 4.40, 95%CI 3.57-5.43) when compared to those patients without such a code. Patients were less likely to be older (>75 years:OR 0.70, 95%CI 0.56-0.87) and were more likely to be from the most deprived areas of Scotland (Quintile 5: OR 2.02, 95%CI 1.50-2.70) if they refused to attend for review or did not reply to letters asking for attendance at primary care clinics. Patients with multiple co-morbidities were more likely to have exclusions for achieving diagnostic clinical targets such as cholesterol control (3 or more co-morbidities: OR 3.37, 95%CI 2.50-4.50).

CONCLUSION

Scottish practices have appeared to use exception reporting appropriately by excluding patients who are older or have dementia. However, younger or more socio-economically deprived patients were more likely to be recorded as having refused to attend for review or not replying to letters asking for attendance at primary care clinics. It is important for primary care practices to identify and monitor these individuals so that all patients fully benefit from the implementation of an incentive based contract and receive appropriate clinical care to prevent stroke recurrence, further disability and mortality.