The quality and outcomes framework: Too early for a final verdict

British Journal of General Practice

Volumn 57, Issue 540, 2007, Pages 525-527

  Roland, Martin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASTHMA; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; DIABETES MELLITUS; EDITORIAL; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE AVAILABILITY; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; HEALTH PROGRAM; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICAL CARE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL FEE; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PATIENT CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; PROFESSIONALISM; QUALITY CONTROL;

FAMILY PRACTICE; HUMANS; OUTCOME AND PROCESS ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); REIMBURSEMENT, INCENTIVE;

EID: 34447259834     PISSN: 09601643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Editorial

References (27)

1. Marshall M, Roland M. The new contract renaissance or requiem for general practice? Br J Gen Pract 2002; 52(480): 531-532.
2. Campbell S, Roland MO, Middleton E, Reeves D. Improvements in the quality of clinical care in English general practice 1998-2003: longitudinal observational study. BMJ 2005; 331(7525): 1121-1123.
3. Khunti K, Baker R, Rumsey M, Lakhani M. Approaches to the organization of multi-practice audits in primary health care in tha UK. Int J Qual Health Care 1999; 11(3): 221-226.
4. Hearnshaw H, Baker R, Cooper A. A survey of audit activity in general practice. Br J Gen Pract 1998 48(427): 979-981.
5. Campbell S, Reeves D, Kontopantelis E, et al. Improvements in clinical quality in English primary care before and after the introduction of a pay for performance scheme longitudinal cohort study. N Engl J Med (in press).
6. McElduff P, Lyratzopoulos G, Edwards R, et al. Will changes in primary care improve health outcomes? Modelling the impact of financial incentives introduced to improve quality of care in the UK. Qual Saf Health Care 2004; 13(3): 191-197
7. Mangin D, Toop I. The Quality and Outcomes Framework: what have you done to yourselves? Br J Gen Pract 2007; 57: 435-437.
8. Campbell SM, Roland MO, Shekelle PG. et al. The development of review criteria for assessing the quality of management of stable angina, adult asthma and non insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in general practice. Qual Health Care 1999; 8: 6-15.
9. Doran T, Fullwood C, Gravelle H, et al. Pay for performance programs in family practices in the United Kingdom. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 375-384.
10. NHS Information Centre. Quality and Outcomes Framework for GP practices. http://www.qof.ic.nhs.uk/ (accessed 7 Jun 2007).
11. Carey I, DeWilde S, Harris T, et al. Spurious trends in coronary heart disease incidence. Br J Gen Pract 2007; 57: 486-489.
12. Guthrie B, McLean G, Sutton M. Workload and reward in the Quality and Outcomes Framework of the 2004 general practice contract. Br J Gen Pract 2006; 56: 836-841.
13. Baker D, Middleton E. Cervical screening and health inequality in England in the 1990s. J Epidemiol Community Health 2003; 57(6): 417-423.
14. Middleton E, Baker D. Comparison of social distribution of immunisation with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, England, 1991-2001. BMJ 2003; 326: 854.
15. Ashworth M, Seed P, Armstrong D. The relationship between social deprivation and the quality of primary care: a national survey using indicators from the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework Br J Gen Pract 2007; 57: 441-448.
16. McLean G, Sutton M, Guthrie B. Deprivation and quality of primary care services. Evidence for persistence of the inverse care law for the UK quality and outcomes framework. J Epidemiol Community Health 2006; 60: 917-922.
17. Wright J, Martin D, Cockings S, Polack C. Overall quality and outcome frame score lower in practices in deprived areas. Br J Gen Pract 2006; 56: 277-279.
18. Steele N, Maisey S, Clark A, et al. Quality of clinical primary care and targeted incentive payments: an observational study. Br J Gen Pract 2007; 57: 449-454.
19. Ganz DA, Wenger NS, Roth CP, et al. The effect of a quality improvement initiative on the quality of other aspects of health care: the law of unintended consequences? Med Care 2007 45(1): 8-18.
20. Roland M, Campbell S, Bailey N, et al. Financial incentives to improve the quality of primary care in the UK: predicting the consequences of change. Primary Health Care Research and Development 2006; 7: 18-26.
21. McDonald R, Harrison H, Checkland K, et al. Impact of financial incentives on clinical autonomy and internal motivation in primary care: ethnographic study. BMJ: in press.
22. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Publishing, 1985.
23. Deci EL, Koestner R, Ryan RM. A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on internal motivation. Psychol Bull 1999; 125: 627-668.
24. Fairhurst K, May C. What general practitioners find satisfying in their work: implications for healthcare system reform. Ann Fam Med 2006; 4: 500-505.
25. Pereira Gray D. Role reversal between primary and secondary care. Med Educ 2003; 37: 754-755.
26. Shea K, Holmgren A, Osborn R, Schoen K. Health system performance in selected nations. Commonwealth Fund, New York 2007. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/usr_doc/ Shea_hltsysperformanceselectednations_chartpack.pdf?section=4039 (accessed 7 Jun 2007).
27. Epstein A, Lee T. Paying physicians for high quality care. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 406-410.