Literature DB >> 22751252

Do the Quality and Outcomes Framework patient experience indicators reward practices that offer improved access?

Richard Baker1, M John Bankart, Ged M Murtagh.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) includes indicators for patient experience, but there has been little research on whether the indicators identify practices that deliver good patient access. AIM: To determine whether practices that achieved high QOF patient experience points in 2005/2006 or 2006/2007 also delivered good patient access. DESIGN OF STUDY: Use of publicly available data to investigate two hypotheses: practices with more positive access survey findings in 2006/2007 will be more likely to have achieved maximum QOF patient experience points in the same year; and practices with maximum QOF patient experience points in 2005/2006 will have higher access survey findings in 2006/2007.
SETTING: Two-hundred and twenty-four East Midlands general practices.
METHOD: For hypothesis one, binary logistic regression was used, with achievement of maximum QOF points as the dependent variable, and access survey findings, responder variables, and practice variables as independent variables. For hypothesis two, general linear models were used, with access survey findings as the independent variables, and achievement of maximum QOF points and the responder and practice variables as dependent variables.
RESULTS: The findings did not support the first hypothesis. For the second hypothesis, achievement of maximum QOF points was only significantly associated with patient satisfaction with opening hours (positive correlation). QOF points were not associated with any other aspect of access.
CONCLUSION: The QOF patient experience indicators do not reward practices that offer good patient access. A standard patient survey with financial incentive may be more effective in identifying and rewarding practices that offer better access, including opportunity to book appointments with a particular doctor.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 22751252      PMCID: PMC2714801          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp09X453792

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  10 in total

1.  Quality incentives: the case of U.K. general practitioners.

Authors:  Peter C Smith; Nick York
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  Up close and personal? Continuing pressure on the doctor-patient relationship in the QOF era.

Authors:  George Freeman
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  What type of general practice do patients prefer? Exploration of practice characteristics influencing patient satisfaction.

Authors:  R Baker; J Streatfield
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Practice size: impact on consultation length, workload, and patient assessment of care.

Authors:  J L Campbell; J Ramsay; J Green
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Practice size and quality attainment under the new GMS contract: a cross-sectional analysis.

Authors:  Yingying Wang; Catherine A O'Donnell; Daniel F Mackay; Graham Cm Watt
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  Interpersonal continuity of care: a cross-sectional survey of primary care patients' preferences and their experiences.

Authors:  Richard Baker; Mary Boulton; Kate Windridge; Carolyn Tarrant; John Bankart; George K Freeman
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Quality of clinical primary care and targeted incentive payments: an observational study.

Authors:  Nicholas Steel; Susan Maisey; Allan Clark; Robert Fleetcroft; Amanda Howe
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.386

8.  Diabetes care and the new GMS contract: the evidence for a whole county.

Authors:  Abd A Tahrani; Mary McCarthy; Jojo Godson; Sarah Taylor; Helen Slater; Nigel Capps; Probal Moulik; Andrew F Macleod
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Pay-for-performance programs in family practices in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Tim Doran; Catherine Fullwood; Hugh Gravelle; David Reeves; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Urara Hiroeh; Martin Roland
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2006-07-27       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  The General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (GPAQ) - development and psychometric characteristics.

Authors:  Nicola Mead; Peter Bower; Martin Roland
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 2.497

  10 in total
  2 in total

1.  Satisfaction, demand, and opening hours in primary care: an observational study.

Authors:  Claire L Morgan; Hendrik J Beerstecher
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Analysis of factors associated with waiting times for GP appointments in Finnish health centres: a QUALICOPC study.

Authors:  Elina Tolvanen; Tuomas H Koskela; Kari J Mattila; Elise Kosunen
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2018-04-03
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.