Setting standards of prescribing performance in primary care: Use of a consensus group of general practitioners and application of standards to practices in the north of England

British Journal of General Practice

Volumn 46, Issue 402, 1996, Pages 20-25

  Bateman, D N ^a   Eccles, M ^a   Campbell, M ^a   Soutter, J ^a   Roberts, S J ^a   Smith, J M ^a  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Informal protocols; Prescribing; Prescribing rates; Quality in general practice

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; GENERAL PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; PRESCRIPTION; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE;

DRUG THERAPY; ENGLAND; FAMILY PRACTICE; HUMANS; PRESCRIPTIONS, DRUG; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; STATE MEDICINE;

EID: 0042400996     PISSN: 09601643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Consumers Association. Economic prescribing. Drug Ther Bull 1991; 29: 5-7.
2. Audit Commission. A prescription for improvement: towards more rational prescribing in general practice (23-30). London: HMSO, 1994.
3. McGavock H, Wilson-Davis K, Niblock RWF. Unsuspected patterns of drug utilisation revealed by interrogation of a regional general practice prescribing database. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safety 1992; 1: 73-80.
4. van Zwanenberg TD, Grant GB, Gregory DA. Can rational prescribing be assessed? J R Coll Gen Pract 1987; 37: 308-310.
5. Maxwell M, Heaney D, Howie JGR, Noble S. General practice fundholding: observations on prescribing patterns and costs using the defined daily dose method. BMJ 1993; 307: 1190-1194.
6. British Medical Association, Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British national formulary. No. 26. London: BMA and the Pharmaceutical Press, 1993.
7. World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. Anatomical therapeutic chemical (ATC) classification index (including defined daily doses (DDDs) for plain substances). Oslo, Norway: WHO, 1994.
8. McGlynn EA, Kosecoff J, Brook RH. Format and conduct of consensus development conferences: multi-nation comparison. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1990; 6: 450-469.
9. Brook RH, Kosecoff JB, Park RE, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of coronary disease, comparison of doctors' attitudes in the USA and UK. Lancet 1988; 1: 750-753.
10. Leape LL, Park RE, Kahan JP, Brook RH. Group judgements of appropriateness: the effect of panel composition. Qual Assurance Health Care 1992; 4: 151-159.
11. Catford JC. Quality of prescribing for children in general practice. BMJ 1980; 280: 1435-1437.
12. van den Brink G, Bollen CW, van de Wall OEM, et al. A drug use review study in patients with obstructive lung disease: assessment of the quality of drug therapy. Pharmaceutish Weekblad Sci 1992; 14: 311-315.