Literature DB >> 2224696

Five-year results of the peer assessment program of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

R G McAuley1, W M Paul, G H Morrison, R F Beckett, C H Goldsmith.   

Abstract

The office practices of 918 physicians selected through stratified random sampling from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) registry were assessed by peers and the Peer Assessment Committee of the CPSO from 1981 to 1985. The sample comprised 662 general practitioners (GPs) and family physicians (FPs) and 256 specialists in 11 fields. Of the physicians 749 (82%) had neither deficient records nor an unsatisfactory level of patient care. Of the GPs and FPs 97 (15%) had serious deficiencies in one or both areas, as compared with 4 (2%) of the specialists (p2 less than 0.00001). The proportions of certificants of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada and of the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC) with serious deficiencies were low (2% and 3% respectively). Three statistically significant predictors of physician performance were found among the GPs and FPs: age, CFPC membership status and type of practice. Of the 56 physicians who were reassessed 6 to 12 months later 29 (52%) had made the improvements recommended by the committee. Our findings demonstrate the need, feasibility and acceptance of a peer assessment program of office practices in Ontario.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2224696      PMCID: PMC1452901     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  24 in total

Review 1.  An analysis of ambulatory care quality assessment research.

Authors:  C H Slater
Journal:  Eval Health Prof       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 2.651

2.  Attempting to ensure physician competence.

Authors:  D A Davis; G R Norman; A Painvin; E Lindsay; M S Ragbeer; D Rath
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Quality of care in family practice: does residency training make a difference?

Authors:  A E Borgiel; J I Williams; M J Bass; E V Dunn; M K Evensen; C T Lamont; P J MacDonald; J M McCoy; R A Spasoff
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1989-05-01       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  The relationship of physicians' medical recording performance to their medical care performance.

Authors:  T F Lyons; B C Payne
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1974-05       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Quality-of-care assessment: choosing a method for peer review.

Authors:  R H Brook; F A Appel
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1973-06-21       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Effectiveness of pediatric care: the relationship between processes and outcome.

Authors:  B Starfield; D Scheff
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1972-04       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Continuing education and patient care research. Physician response to screening test results.

Authors:  J W Williamson; M Alexander; G E Miller
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1967-09-18       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Measuring physician behavior.

Authors:  B Gerbert; W A Hargreaves
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Medical audit, continuing medical education and quality assurance.

Authors:  P J Sanazaro
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1976-09

10.  Peer review organizations. Promises and potential pitfalls.

Authors:  P E Dans; J P Weiner; S E Otter
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1985-10-31       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  18 in total

1.  Assessment of physician performance in Alberta: the physician achievement review.

Authors:  W Hall; C Violato; R Lewkonia; J Lockyer; H Fidler; J Toews; P Jennett; M Donoff; D Moores
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-07-13       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Revalidation of doctors in Canada.

Authors:  W D Dauphinee
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-10-30

3.  Outcomes and the management of health care. Health Services Research Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-12-15       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Toward integrated medical resource policies for Canada: 11. Improving effectiveness and efficiency.

Authors:  G L Stoddart; M L Barer
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-12-01       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  Should older family physicians retire?

Authors:  Roger Ladouceur
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 3.275

6.  Factors affecting physician performance: implications for performance improvement and governance.

Authors:  Elizabeth F Wenghofer; A Paul Williams; Daniel J Klass
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2009-11

7.  Quality of care: 1. What is quality and how can it be measured? Health Services Research Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-06-15       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Effects of continuing professional development on clinical performance: results of a study involving family practitioners in Quebec.

Authors:  François Goulet; Eveline Hudon; Robert Gagnon; Eliane Gauvin; Francine Lemire; Isabelle Arsenault
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.275

9.  Making reaccreditation meaningful.

Authors:  F Nicol
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 5.386

10.  Performance assessment. Family physicians in Montreal meet the mark!

Authors:  François Goulet; André Jacques; Robert Gagnon; Denis Bourbeau; Denis Laberge; Jacques Melanson; Claude Ménard; Pierre Racette; Raymond Rivest
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.275

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.