BACKGROUND: There is considerable variation in prescribing, and existing standards against which primary care prescribing is routinely judged consist largely of local or national averages. There is thus a need for more sophisticated standards, which must be widely applicable and have credibility among the general practice profession. AIM: A study aimed to develop a range of criteria of prescribing quality, to set standards of performance for these criteria, and apply these standards to practices. METHOD: A consensus group consisting of eight general practitioners and a resource team was convened to develop and define criteria and set standards of prescribing performance using prescribing analyses and cost (PACT) data. The standards were applied to 1992-93 prescribing data from all 518 practices in the former Northern Regional Health Authority. RESULTS: The group developed criteria and set numeric standards for 13 aspects of prescribing performance in four areas: generic prescribing, prescribing within specific therapeutic groups, drugs of limited clinical value and standards based on prescribing volume. Except for generic prescribing, standards for individual criteria were achieved by between 9% and 34% of practices. For each criterion, a score was allocated based on whether the standard was achieved or not. Total scores showed considerable variation between practices. The distribution of scores was similar between fundholding and non-fundholding practices, and also between dispensing and non-dispensing practices. CONCLUSION: Using a consensus group of general practitioners it is possible to agree criteria and standards of prescribing performance. This novel approach offers a professionally driven method for assessing the quality of prescribing in primary care.
BACKGROUND: There is considerable variation in prescribing, and existing standards against which primary care prescribing is routinely judged consist largely of local or national averages. There is thus a need for more sophisticated standards, which must be widely applicable and have credibility among the general practice profession. AIM: A study aimed to develop a range of criteria of prescribing quality, to set standards of performance for these criteria, and apply these standards to practices. METHOD: A consensus group consisting of eight general practitioners and a resource team was convened to develop and define criteria and set standards of prescribing performance using prescribing analyses and cost (PACT) data. The standards were applied to 1992-93 prescribing data from all 518 practices in the former Northern Regional Health Authority. RESULTS: The group developed criteria and set numeric standards for 13 aspects of prescribing performance in four areas: generic prescribing, prescribing within specific therapeutic groups, drugs of limited clinical value and standards based on prescribing volume. Except for generic prescribing, standards for individual criteria were achieved by between 9% and 34% of practices. For each criterion, a score was allocated based on whether the standard was achieved or not. Total scores showed considerable variation between practices. The distribution of scores was similar between fundholding and non-fundholding practices, and also between dispensing and non-dispensing practices. CONCLUSION: Using a consensus group of general practitioners it is possible to agree criteria and standards of prescribing performance. This novel approach offers a professionally driven method for assessing the quality of prescribing in primary care.