scholarly journals Factors influencing variation in participation in the National Diabetes Audit and the impact on the Quality and Outcomes Framework indicators of diabetes care management

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline E Wright ◽  
Stephen Yeung ◽  
Helen Knowles ◽  
Antoinette Woodhouse ◽  
Emma Barron ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Diabetes Management ◽  
Geographic Area ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Practice Size ◽  
Practice Population ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
General Practices ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Quality And Outcomes Framework

ObjectiveParticipation in the National Diabetes Audit (NDA) has become a contractual requirement for all general practices in England and is used as part of the assessment framework for sustainability and transformation partnership (STP) footprints. The study aimed to investigate general practice-related factors which may influence participation in the NDA, and the impact that participation in the NDA may have on diabetes management and patient care.Research designA cross-sectional analysis of routine primary care data from 45 725 646 patients aged 17+ years registered across 7779 general practices in England was performed using logistic regression. The main outcome measures included general practice voluntary participation in the NDA, general practice-related factors (practice size, deprivation, diabetes prevalence, geographic area, practice population age) and diabetes management outcomes (cholesterol, blood pressure, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)).ResultsParticipation in the NDA differed significantly according to practice size (t(7653)=−9.93, p=0.001), level of deprivation (χ2(9)=36.17, p<0.0001), diabetes prevalence (p<0.0001), practice population age (p<0.0001), and geographic area (χ2(26)=676.9, p<0.0001). In addition, the Quality and Outcomes Framework diabetes indicator HbA1c (OR 1.01, CI 1.0 to 1.01, p=0.0001) but not cholesterol (p=0.055) or blood pressure (p=0.76) was independently associated with NDA participation when controlling for practice-related factors.ConclusionVariation in NDA participation exists. It is suggested that some practices may need additional support when submitting data to the NDA and that NDA participation may have an impact on diabetes outcomes. However, the use of NDA outcomes as a measure of progress with diabetes care by STPs is still unclear and further investigation is needed.

scholarly journals Workload impact of the Quality and Outcomes Framework for patients with diabetes: an interrupted time series in general practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (685) ◽  
pp. e570-e577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Gilbert ◽  
Victoria Allgar ◽  
Tim Doran
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Time Series ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Interrupted Time Series ◽  
Clinical Practice Research Datalink ◽  
Clinical Consultation ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Quality And Outcomes Framework

BackgroundThere are substantial concerns about GP workload. The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) has been perceived by both professionals and patients as bureaucratic, but the full impact of the QOF on GP workload is not well known.AimTo assess the impact of the QOF on GP consultation rates for patients with diabetes mellitus.Design and settingThis study used interrupted time series of 13 248 745 general practice consultations for 37 065 patients with diabetes mellitus in England.MethodClinical Practice Research Datalink general practice data were used from 2000/2001 to 2014/2015, with introduction of the QOF (1 April 2004) as the intervention, and mean annual GP consultation rates as the primary outcome.ResultsMean annual GP clinical consultation rates were 8.10 per patient in 2000/2001, 6.91 in 2004/2005, and 7.09 in 2014/2015. Introduction of the QOF was associated with an annual change in the trend of GP clinical consultation rates of 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.23 to 0.69, P = 0.001) consultations per patient, giving a post-QOF trend increasing by 0.018 consultations per year. Introduction of the QOF was associated with an immediate stepped increase of ‘other’ out-of-hours and non-clinical encounters, and trend change of 0.57 (95% CI = 0.34 to 0.81, P<0.001) per year, resulting in a post-QOF trend increasing by 0.27 other encounters per year.ConclusionIntroduction of the QOF was associated with a modest increase in clinical GP consultation rates and substantial increase in other encounters for patients with diabetes independent of changes in diabetes prevalence. National prevalence of diabetes increased by 90.7% from 2004/2005 to 2014/2015, which, combined with this study’s findings, means GPs would have provided nearly double the number of consultations for patients with diabetes over this timescale.

scholarly journals Longitudinal evaluation of a countywide alternative to the Quality and Outcomes Framework in UK General Practice aimed at improving Person Centred Coordinated Care

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. e029721 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Close ◽  
Ben Fosh ◽  
Hannah Wheat ◽  
Jane Horrell ◽  
William Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Coordinated Care ◽  
Long Term Conditions ◽  
Admission Data ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
Time Savings ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Quality And Outcomes Framework

ObjectivesTo evaluate a county-wide deincentivisation of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) payment scheme for UK General Practice (GP).SettingIn 2014, National Health Service England signalled a move towards devolution of QOF to Clinical Commissioning Groups. Fifty-five GPs in Somerset established the Somerset Practice Quality Scheme (SPQS)—a deincentivisation of QOF—with the goal of redirecting resources towards Person Centred Coordinated Care (P3C), especially for those with long-term conditions (LTCs). We evaluated the impact on processes and outcomes of care from April 2016 to March 2017.Participants and designThe evaluation used data from 55 SPQS practices and 17 regional control practices for three survey instruments. We collected patient experiences (‘P3C-EQ’; 2363 returns from patients with 1+LTC; 36% response rate), staff experiences (‘P3C-practitioner’; 127 professionals) and organisational data (‘P3C-OCT’; 36 of 55 practices at two time points, 65% response rate; 17 control practices). Hospital Episode Statistics emergency admission data were analysed for 2014–2017 for ambulatory-sensitive conditions across Somerset using interrupted time series.ResultsPatient and practitioner experiences were similar in SPQS versus control practices. However, discretion from QOF incentives resulted in time savings in the majority of practices, and SPQS practice data showed a significant increase in P3C oriented organisational processes, with a moderate effect size (Wilcoxon signed rank test; p=0.01; r=0.42). Analysis of transformation plans and organisational data suggested stronger federation-level agreements and informal networks, increased multidisciplinary working, reallocation of resources for other healthcare professionals and changes to the structure and timings of GP appointments. No disbenefits were detected in admission data.ConclusionThe SPQS scheme leveraged time savings and reduced administrative burden via discretionary removal of QOF incentives, enabling practices to engage actively in a number of schemes aimed at improving care for people with LTCs. We found no differences in the experiences of patients or healthcare professionals between SPQS and control practices.

scholarly journals Standing order use in general practice: the views of medicine, nursing and pharmacy stakeholder organisations

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robyn Taylor ◽  
Eileen McKinlay ◽  
Caroline Morris
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
General Practitioner ◽  
Access To Health Care ◽  
Timely Manner ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Standing Order ◽  
Access To Health ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Pharmacy Data ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Standing orders are used by many general practices in New Zealand. They allow a practice nurse to assess patients and administer and/or supply medicines without needing intervention from a general practitioner. AIM To explore organisational strategic stakeholders’ views of standing order use in general practice nationally. METHODS Eight semi-structured, qualitative, face-to-face interviews were conducted with participants representing key primary care stakeholder organisations from nursing, medicine and pharmacy. Data were analysed using a qualitative inductive thematic approach. RESULTS Three key themes emerged: a lack of understanding around standing order use in general practice, legal and professional concerns, and the impact on workforce and clinical practice. Standing orders were perceived to extend nursing practice and seen as a useful tool in enabling patients to access medicines in a safe and timely manner. DISCUSSION The variability in understanding of the definition and use of standing orders appears to relate to a lack of leadership in this area. Leadership should facilitate the required development of standardised resources and quality assurance measures to aid implementation. If these aspects are addressed, then standing orders will continue to be a useful tool in general practice and enable patients to have access to health care and, if necessary, to medicines without seeing a general practitioner.

scholarly journals The links between the amount of antipsychotic medication prescribed at GP practice level, local demographic factors and medication selection

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S165-S166
Author(s):  
Adrian Heald ◽  
Mike Stedman ◽  
Sanam Farman ◽  
Mark Davies ◽  
Roger Gadsby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Antipsychotic Medication ◽  
Demographic Factors ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
World Health ◽  
Pharmacological Intervention ◽  
Practice Population ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Antipsychotic Prescribing

AimsTo examine the factors that relate to antipsychotic prescribing in general practices across England and how these relate to cost changes in recent years.BackgroundAntipsychotic medications are the first-line pharmacological intervention for severe mental illnesses(SMI) such as schizophrenia and other psychoses, while also being used to relieve distress and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia.Since 2014 many antipsychotic agents have moved to generic provision. In 2017_18 supplies of certain generic agents were affected by substantial price increases.MethodThe study examined over time the prescribing volume and prices paid for antipsychotic medication by agent in primary care and considered if price change affected agent selection by prescribers.The NHS in England/Wales publishes each month the prescribing in general practice by BNF code. This was aggregated for the year 2018_19 using Defined Daily doses (DDD) as published by the World Health Organisation Annual Therapeutic Classification (WHO/ATC) and analysed by delivery method and dose level. Cost of each agent year-on-year was determined.Monthly prescribing in primary care was consolidated over 5 years (2013-2018) and DDD amount from WHO/ATC for each agent was used to convert the amount to total DDD/practice.ResultDescriptionIn 2018_19 there were 10,360,865 prescriptions containing 136 million DDD with costs of £110 million at an average cost of £0.81/DDD issued in primary care. We included 5,750 GP Practices with practice population >3000 and with >30 people on their SMI register.Effect of priceIn 2017_18 there was a sharp increase in overall prices and they had not reduced to expected levels by the end of the 2018_19 evaluation year. There was a gradual increase in antipsychotic prescribing over 2013-2019 which was not perturbed by the increase in drug price in 2017/18.RegressionDemographic factorsThe strongest positive relation to increased prescribing of antipsychotics came from higher social disadvantage, higher population density(urban), and comorbidities e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(COPD). Higher %younger and %older populations, northerliness and non-white (Black and Minority Ethnic (BME)) ethnicity were all independently associated with less antipsychotic prescribing.Prescribing FactorsHigher DDD/general practice population was linked with higher %injectable, higher %liquid, higher doses/prescription and higher %zuclopenthixol. Less DDD/population was linked with general practices using higher %risperidone and higher spending/dose of antipsychotic.ConclusionHigher levels of antipsychotic prescribing are driven by social factors/comorbidities. The link with depot medication prescriptions, alludes to the way that antipsychotics can induce receptor supersensitivity with consequent dose escalation.

scholarly journals Links between the amount of antipsychotic medication prescribed per population at general practice level, local demographic factors and medication selection

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A. H. Heald ◽  
M. Stedman ◽  
S. Farman ◽  
C. Khine ◽  
M. Davies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Antipsychotic Medication ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Pharmacological Intervention ◽  
Defined Daily Dose ◽  
Practice Level ◽  
Practice Population ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Antipsychotic Prescribing

Abstract Background Antipsychotic medications are the first-line pharmacological intervention for severe mental illnesses (SMI) such as schizophrenia and other psychoses, while also being used to relieve distress and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia. Our aim was to examine the factors relating to antipsychotic prescribing in general practices across England and how cost changes in recent years have impacted on antipsychotic prescribing. Methods The study examined over time the prescribing volume and prices paid for antipsychotic medication by agent in primary care. Monthly prescribing in primary care was consolidated over 5 years (2013–2018) and DDD amount from WHO/ATC for each agent was used to convert the amount to total DDD/practice. The defined Daily Dose (DDD is the assumed average maintenance dose per day for a drug used for its main indication in adults. Results We included 5750 general practices with practice population > 3000 and with > 30 people on their SMI register. In 2018/19 there were 10,360,865 prescriptions containing 136 million DDD with costs of £110 million at an average cost of £0.81/DDD issued in primary care. In 2017/18 there was a sharp increase in overall prices and they had not reduced to expected levels by the end of the 2018/19 evaluation year. There was a gradual increase in antipsychotic prescribing over 2013–2019 which was not perturbed by the increase in drug price in 2017/18. The strongest positive relation to increased prescribing of antipsychotics came from higher social disadvantage, higher population density (urban), and comorbidities e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Higher % younger and % older populations, northerliness and non-white (Black and Minority Ethnic(BAME)) ethnicity were all independently associated with less antipsychotic prescribing. Higher DDD/general practice population was linked with higher proportion(%) injectable, higher %liquid, higher doses/prescription and higher %zuclopenthixol depot. Less DDD/population was linked with general practices using higher % risperidone and higher spending/dose of antipsychotic. Conclusions The levels of antipsychotic prescribing at general practice level are driven by social factors/comorbidities. We found a link between depot prescriptions with higher antipsychotic DDD and risperidone prescriptions with lower antipsychotic DDD. It is important that all prescribers are aware of these drivers / links.

scholarly journals Socioeconomic deprivation scores as predictors of variations in NHS practice payments: a longitudinal study of English general practices 2013–2017

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (685) ◽  
pp. e546-e554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis S Levene ◽  
Richard Baker ◽  
John Bankart ◽  
Nicola Walker ◽  
Andrew Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Independent Variables ◽  
Practice Population ◽  
Longitudinal Variations ◽  
General Practices ◽  
Organisational Factors ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Index Of Multiple Deprivation

BackgroundA previous study found that variables related to population health needs were poor predictors of cross-sectional variations in practice payments.AimTo investigate whether deprivation scores predicted variations in the increase over time of total payments to general practices per patient, after adjustment for potential confounders.Design and settingLongitudinal multilevel model for 2013–2017; 6900 practices (84.4% of English practices).MethodPractices were excluded if total adjusted payments per patient were <£10 or >£500 per patient or if deprivation scores were missing. Main outcome measures were adjusted total NHS payments; calculated by dividing total NHS payments, after deductions and premises payments, by the number of registered patients in each practice. A total of 17 independent variables relating to practice population and organisational factors were included in the model after checking for collinearity.ResultsAfter adjustment for confounders and the logarithmic transformation of the dependent and main independent variables (due to extremely skewed [positive] distribution of payments), practice deprivation scores predicted very weakly longitudinal variations in total payments’ slopes. For each 10% increase in the Index of Multiple Deprivation score, practice payments increased by only 0.06%. The large sample size probably explains why eight of the 17 confounders were significant predictors, but with very small coefficients. Most of the variability was at practice level (intraclass correlation = 0.81).ConclusionThe existing NHS practice payment formula has demonstrated very little redistributive potential and is unlikely to substantially narrow funding gaps between practices with differing workloads caused by the impact of deprivation.

The impact of statins, ace inhibitors and gastric acid suppressants on pneumonia mortality in a UK general practice population cohort

2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 697-703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Puja R. Myles ◽  
Richard B. Hubbard ◽  
Jack E. Gibson ◽  
Zara Pogson ◽  
Christopher J.P. Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Gastric Acid ◽  
Ace Inhibitors ◽  
Population Cohort ◽  
Practice Population ◽  
The Impact
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document