Review of performance assessment and improvement in ambulatory medical care

Health Policy

Volumn 77, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 64-75

  Contencin, Philippe ^a   Falcoff, Hector ^a   Doumenc, Michel ^a  

^a ANAES   (France)

Author keywords

Audits; Peer review; Performance assessment; Primary care; Quality of care

Indexed keywords

AMBULATORY CARE; ANALYTIC METHOD; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONSULTATION; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CULTURAL FACTOR; EUROPE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MANDATORY PROGRAM; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICAL EXPERT; MOTIVATION; PATIENT CARE; PEER REVIEW; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; PHYSICIAN; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PUBLIC OPINION; REVIEW;

AMBULATORY CARE; EUROPE; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE;

EID: 33646099397     PISSN: 01688510     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.07.017     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The development and implementation of quality improvement systems (QIS) in health care. Recommendation No. R (97) 17. Strasbourg: COE, 1997.
2. Council of Europe. Recommendation. Rec(2001)13 on developing a methodology for drawing up guidelines on best medical practices and explanatory memorandum. See http://www.coe.int/T/E/Social_Cohesion/Health/Recommendations/Rec(2001)13.asp (accessed December 2004).
3. Davis D., O'Brien M.A., Freemantle N., et al. Impact of formal continuing medical education: do conferences, workshops, rounds and other traditional continuing education activities change physician behavior or health care outcomes?. Journal of the American Medical Association 282 (1999) 867-874
4. The NHS confederation. New GMS contract. See: http://www.nhsconfed.org/gms/default.asp (accessed December 2004).
5. Decret no 99-1130 du 28 decembre 1999 relatif a l'evaluation des pratiques professionnelles et a l'analyse de l'evolution des depenses medicales. Journal Officiel de la Republique Francaise, 29 decembre 1999.
6. Base francaise d'evaluation en sante. See: http://bfes.anaes.fr/HTML/index.html (accessed December 2004).
7. Grol R., Baker R., Wensing M., et al. Quality assurance in general practice: the state of the art in Europe. Family Practice 11 (1994) 460-467
8. Bentzen N. WONCA international glossary for general/family practice. Family Practice 12 (1995) 267
9. van den Hombergh P., Grol R., van den Hoogen H.J., and van den Bosch W.J. Practice visits as a tool in quality improvement: acceptance and feasibility. Quality in Health Care 3 (1999) 167-171
10. Royal College of General Practitioners. Fellowship by Assessment. The Royal College of General Practitioners, London, 2nd ed., 1995.
11. Hearnshaw H.M., Harker R.M., Cheater F.M., Baker R.H., and Grimshaw G.M. Are audits wasting resources by measuring the wrong things? A survey of methods used to select audit review criteria. Qual Saf Health Care 12 (2003) 24-28
12. Kelly L. Record keeping: synonymous with quality of care. Canadian Family Physician 44 (1998) 29
13. Department of Health. Delivering 21st century IT support for the NHS: national strategic programme. London: Department of Health, 2002. See: www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/06/71/12/04067112.pdf (accessed December 2004).
14. Holden J.D. Systematic review of published multi-practice audits from British general practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 10 (2004) 247-272
15. Johnston G., Crombie I.K., Davies H.T., et al. Reviewing audit: barriers and facilitating factors for effective clinical audit. Quality in Health Care 9 (2000) 23-26
16. van den Hombergh P. Practice visits. Assessing and improving management in general practice [Thesis]. University of Nijmegen: WOK, 1998.
17. Gerlach F.M., Beyer M., and Romer A. Quality circles in ambulatory care: state of development and future perspective in Germany. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 10 (1998) 35-42
18. Egli N. Continuous quality improvement by peer review groups. In: Alles V., Mäkelä M., Persson L., et al. (Eds). Tools and methods for quality improvement in general practice (EQuiP) (1998), Gummerus Printing, Jyväskylä 86
19. Schweizerische Gesellschaft fur Allgemeine Medizin. Qualitatszirkel. See: http://www.sgam.ch/index.htm (accessed December 2004).
20. Weisser P., Harter M., and Tausch B. Family practice quality circles between goals and reality: an interaction analysis. Zeitschrift Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 94 (2000) 4-10
21. Munck A. Audit project odense a scandinavian audit centre for general practice. Auditing in Trends 3 (1995) 18-21
22. Forskningsenheden for Almen Praksis i Odense. Audit Projekt Odense (APO). See: http://www.almen.dk/odense/ (accessed December 2004).
23. Lauven G., Becker H., Euteneuer H., et al. Basic tenets for quality circles in north Rhine medical service of public health insurance. Zeitschrift Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 94 (2000) 71-77
24. Beyer M., Gerlach F.M., Flies U., Grol R., Krol Z., Munck A., et al. The development of quality circles/peer review groups as a method of quality improvement in Europe Results of a survey in 26 European countries. Family Practice 20 (2003) 443-451
25. Lagerlov P., Loeb M., Andrew M., and Hjortdahl P. Improving doctor's behaviour through reflection on guidelines and prescription feedback: a randomised controlled study. Quality in Health Care 9 (2000) 159-165
26. Welschen I., Kuyvenhoven M.M., Hoes A.W., and Verheij T.J. Effectiveness of a multiple intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract symptoms in primary care: randomised controlled trial. British Medical Journal 329 (2004) 431
27. Verstappen W.H., van der Weidjden T., Dubois W.I., Smeele I., Hermsen J., Tan F.E., et al. Improving test ordering in primary care: the added value of a small-group quality improvement strategy compared with classic feedback only. Annals of Family Medicine 2 (2004) 569-575
28. Walker J., and Mathers N. The impact of a general practice group intervention on prescribing costs and patterns. British Journal of General Practice 52 478 (2002) 412-413
29. Bergsma J. Onderlinge toetsing der pratijkvoering door huisartsen. Huisarts Wet 9 (1966) 82-87
30. Eliasson G., Berg L., Carlsson P., et al. Facilitating quality improvement in primary health care by practice visiting. Quality in Health Care 7 (1998) 48-54
31. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. Peer Assessment Program. See: http://www.cpso.on.ca/Info_physicians/peer.htm (accessed December 2004).
32. Royal College of General Practitioners. Membership by Assessment of Performance (MAP). See: http://www.rcgp.org.uk/map/usersguide.asp (accessed December 2004).
33. Australia General Practice Accreditation Ltd. Accreditation. See: http://www.agpal.com.au/subpage.asp?page=content&Id=2 (accessed December 2004).
34. SWISSPEP. Quali Doc programme. See: http://www.swisspep.ch/pages/sitemap_e.html (accessed December 2004).
35. Norton P.G., and Dunn E.V. What factors affect quality of care? Using the peer assessment program in Ontario family practices. Canadian Family Physician 43 (1997) 1739-1744
36. Sluijs E.M., Bennema-Broos M., and Wagner C. Dentists and mutual practice visitation. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd 109 (2002) 20-24
37. College des Medecins du Quebec. A system of monitoring and improving the performance of physicians. See: http://www.cmq.org/asp/english.asp?id=919 (accessed December 2004).
38. Hall W., Violato C., Lewkonia R., et al. Assessment of physician performance in Alberta The physician achievement review. Canadian Medical Association Journal 161 (1999) 52-57
39. College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta. Physician Achievement Review. See: http://www.par-program.org/PAR-History2.htm (accessed December 2004).
40. Munck A. A Nordic collaboration on medical audit. The APO method for quality development and continuous medical education (CME) in primary health care. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care 16 (1998) 2-6
41. General Medical Council. Protecting the public. See: http://www.gmc-uk.org/about/default.htm/ (accessed December 2004).
42. The DrsReference site. Accreditation. See: http://www.drsref.com.au/accreditation.html (accessed December 2004).
43. Ministere des Affaires sociales, de la Sante publique et de l'Environnement. Accreditation des medecins. See: http://www.health.fgov.be/AGP/fr/professions/medecins/accreditation/professions_medicales-generaliste-accreditation_medicale.htm (accessed December 2004).
44. Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners. Maintenance of Professional Standards (MOPS). See: http://www.rnzcgp.org.nz/mops.php (accessed December 2004).
45. Royal College of General Practitioners. Quality Team Development. See: http://www.rcgp.org.uk/qtd/index.asp (accessed December 2004).
46. Lindman A. Guide medicine. In: Alles V., Mäkelä M., Persson L., et al. (Eds). Tools and methods for quality improvement in general practice (EQuiP) (1998), Gummerus Printing, Jyvaskyla 32-33
47. Lombarts M.J., and Klazinga N.S. Supporting Dutch medical specialists with the implementation of visitatie recommendations: a descriptive evaluation of a 2-year project. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 15 (2003) 119-129
48. Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Allgemeinmedizin. Qualitatszirkel im Umbruch? See: http://www.ssmg.ch/pdf/03-01-05.Mod.Info.Umfrage.pdf and: http://www.qualitaetszirkel.ch/cgi-bin/WebObjects/THECLUB.woa/wa/default?mandant=HTS000 (accessed December 2004).
49. Baker R., Hearnshaw H., Cooper A., et al. Assessing the work of medical audit advisory groups in promoting audit in general practice. Quality in Health Care 4 (1995) 234-239
50. Department of Health (UK); Health service developments. Medical audit in the family practitioner services. London: Department of Health, 1990.
51. Commission for Health Improvement. Clinical audits. See: http://www.chi.nhs.uk/eng/audit/index.shtml (accessed December 2004).
52. Healthcare commission. Performance ratings. See: http://ratings2004.healthcarecommission.org.uk/ (accessed December 2004).
53. Department of Health. Appraisals, Revalidation. See: http://www.dh.gov.uk/PolicyAndGuidance/HumanResourcesAndTraining/LearningAndPersonalDevelopment/Appraisals/fs/en (accessed December 2004).
54. Loi no 2004-810 du 13 aout 2004 relative a l'assurance maladie. Article 14. Journal Officiel de la Republique Francaise, 17 aout 2004.
55. Durand-Zaleski I., and Chaix C. Financial incentives Comment ameliorer les pratiques medicales?. In: Durieux P. (Ed). Approche comparee internationale (1998), Medecine-Sciences Flammarion, Paris 43-56
56. Spooner A., Chapple A., and Roland M. What makes British general practitioners take part in a quality improvement scheme?. Journal of Health Service Research Policy 6 (2001) 145-150
57. Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. Australian Medical Council (AMC) accreditation. See: http://www.racgp.org.au/document.asp?id=8498 (accessed December 2004).
58. Den norske laegeforening (Norwegian Medical Association). Spesialistutdanning. See: http://www.legeforeningen.no/index.db2?id=1058&PHPSESSID=70fdeff0473a730e3f06d7024a63e6af (accessed December 2004).
59. Walker J., and Mathers N. Working together: a qualitative study of effective group formation amongst GPs during a cost-driven prescribing initiative. Family Practice 21 (2004) 552-558
60. Steinkhol M., and Niemann D. General practice quality circles in the large city Participation by Hamburg general physicians. Zeitschrift Arztl Fortbild 90 (1997) 747-751
61. MacFarlane F., Greenhalgh T., Schofield T., and Desombre T. RCGP Quality team development programme: an illuminative evaluation. Quality in Safety Health Care 13 (2004) 356-362
62. Michel C. Cercle de la qualite: rompre l'isolement, enrichir son experience. Revue Du Praticien MG 14 (2000) 1462-1464
63. Errebo-Knudsen L. Supervision groups. In: Alles V., Mäkelä M., Persson L., et al. (Eds). Tools and methods for quality improvement in general practice (EQuiP) (1998), Jyväskylä, Gummerus Printing 44
64. Harter M., Vauth R., Tausch B., et al. Goals, content and evaluation of training seminars for quality circle moderators. Zeitschrift Arztl Fortbild 90 (1996) 394-399
65. Hartmann P., Grusser M., and Jorgens V. Structured public health quality circle on the topic of diabetes management in general practice. Zeitschrift Arztl Fortbild 89 (1995) 415-418
66. von Ferber L., Baush J., Koster I., et al. Pharmacotherapeutic circles. Results of an 18-month peer review prescribing-improvement programme for general practitioners. Pharmacoeconomics 16 (1999) 273-283
67. Senez B. Application de l'audit clinique a un medecin generaliste isole. Revue Du Praticien MG 9 (1995) 50-52
68. Borgiel A.E., Williams J.I., and Davis D.A. Evaluating the effectiveness of 2 educational interventions in family practice. Canadian Medical Association Journal 161 (1999) 965-970
69. Ram P., Grol R., Rethans J.J., et al. Assessment of general practitioners by video observation of communicative and medical performance in daily practice: issues of validity, reliability and feasibility. Medical Education 33 (1999) 447-454
70. Lanier D.C., Roland M., Burstin H., and Knottnerus J.A. Doctor performance and public accountability. Lancet 362 (2003) 1404-1408
71. Sluijs E.M., Outinen M., Wagner C., Liukko M., and de Bakker D.H. The impact of legislative versus non-legislative quality policy in health care: a comparison between two countries. Health Policy 58 (2001) 99-119
72. Klazinga N. Re-engineering trust: the adoption and adaptation of four models for external quality assurance of health care services in western European health care systems. International Journal of Quality Health Care 12 (2000) 183-189
73. van den Hombergh P., Grol P., and van den Hoogen H.J. Practice visits as a tool in quality improvement: mutual visits and feedback by peers compared with visits and feedback by non-physician observers. Quality in Health Care 8 (1999) 161-166
74. Marshall M., Sheaff R., Rogers A., Campbell S., Halliwell S., Pickard S., et al. A qualitative study of the cultural changes in primary care organisations needed to implement clinical governance. British Journal of General Practice 52 (2002) 641-645
75. Irvine D. The performance of doctors: the new professionalism. Lancet 353 (1999) 1174-1177
76. Kaissi A., Kralewski J., Curoe A., Dowd B., and Silversmith J. How does the culture of medical group practices influence the types of programs used to assure quality of care?. Health Care Management Review 29 (2004) 129-138
77. Rothman D.J. Medical professionalism: focusing on the real issues. New England Journal of Medicine 342 (2000) 1284-1286
78. Grol P., Wensing M., and Mainz J. Patients' priorities with respect to general practice care: an international comparison European Task Force on Patient Evaluations of General Practice (EUROPEP). Family Practice 16 (1999) 4-11
79. Kazandjian V.A. Power to the people: taking the assessment of physician performance outside the profession. Journal of the American Medical Association 161 (1999) 44-45
80. Wensing M., Mainz J., Ferreira P., et al. General practice care and patients' priorities in Europe: an international comparison. Health Policy 45 (1998) 175-186
81. Grol P., Wensing M., and Mainz J. Patients in Europe evaluate general practice care: an international comparison. British in Journal General Practice 50 (2000) 882-887
82. Shaw C. External quality mechanisms for health care: summary of the ExPeRT project on visitatie, accreditation EFQM and ISO assessment in European Union countries. International Journal of Quality Health Care 12 (2000) 169-175
83. Ram P., Grol R., van den Hombergh P., Rethans J.J., van der Vleuten C., and Aretz K. Structure and process: the relationship between practice management and actual clinical performance in general practice. Family Practice 15 (1998) 354-362
84. Cucic S. European Union health policy and its implications for national convergence. International Journal of Quality Health Care 12 (2000) 217-225