Literature DB >> 12614700

The role of performance indicators in changing the autonomy of the general practice profession in the UK.

M Exworthy1, E K Wilkinson, A McColl, M Moore, P Roderick, H Smith, J Gabbay.   

Abstract

Performance indicators (PIs) are widely used across the UK public sector, but they have only recently been applied to clinical care. In doing so, they challenge a previously guarded aspect of clinical autonomy-the assessment of work performance. This "challenge" is specific to a primary care setting and in the general practice profession. This paper reviews the qualitative findings from an empirical study within one English primary care group on the response to a set of clinical PIs relating to general practitioners (GPs) in terms of the effect upon their clinical autonomy. Prior to interviews with GPs, primary care teams received feedback on their clinical performance as judged by indicators. Five themes were crucial in understanding GPs responses: the credibility of PIs, the growing need to demonstrate competence, perceptions of autonomy, the ulterior purpose of PIs, and the identity of the assessor of their performance. PIs are playing a key role in changing the locus of performance assessment along two dimensions: location and expertise. As the locus helps to determine the nature of clinical autonomy, it is likely to have implications for the nature of the general practice profession.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12614700     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00151-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  17 in total

1.  Family physicians' reactions to performance assessment feedback.

Authors:  Margo S Rowan; William Hogg; Carmel Martin; Eileen Vilis
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 2.  Facilitators and barriers to implementing quality measurement in primary mental health care: Systematic review.

Authors:  Donald Addington; Tania Kyle; Soni Desai; JianLi Wang
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Relationship between home care service use and changes in the care needs level of Japanese elderly.

Authors:  Gohei Kato; Nanako Tamiya; Masayo Kashiwagi; Mikiya Sato; Hideto Takahashi
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2009-12-21       Impact factor: 3.921

4.  "My approach to this job is...one person at a time": Perceived discordance between population-level quality targets and patient-centred care.

Authors:  Noah Ivers; Jan Barnsley; Ross Upshur; Karen Tu; Baiju Shah; Jeremy Grimshaw; Merrick Zwarenstein
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.275

5.  Audit and feedback and clinical practice guideline adherence: making feedback actionable.

Authors:  Sylvia J Hysong; Richard G Best; Jacqueline A Pugh
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2006-04-28       Impact factor: 7.327

6.  Can the theoretical domains framework account for the implementation of clinical quality interventions?

Authors:  Wendy Lipworth; Natalie Taylor; Jeffrey Braithwaite
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-12-21       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Medical doctors in healthcare leadership: theoretical and practical challenges.

Authors:  Jean-Louis Denis; Nicolette van Gestel
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2016-05-24       Impact factor: 2.655

8.  Multi-method laboratory user evaluation of an actionable clinical performance information system: Implications for usability and patient safety.

Authors:  Benjamin Brown; Panos Balatsoukas; Richard Williams; Matthew Sperrin; Iain Buchan
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 6.317

9.  Monitoring quality in Israeli primary care: The primary care physicians' perspective.

Authors:  Rachel Nissanholtz-Gannot; Bruce Rosen
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2012-06-20

10.  Use of comparative data for integrated cancer services.

Authors:  Dawn L Wilkinson; Mark McCarthy
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-12-17       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.