The UK pay-for-performance programme in primary care: estimation of population mortality reduction

Background

General practices in the UK contract with the government to receive additional payments for high-quality primary care. Little is known about the resulting impact on population health.

Aim

To estimate the potential reduction in population mortality from implementation of the pay-for-performance contract in England.

Design of study

Cross-sectional and modelling study.

Setting

Primary care in England.

Method

Twenty-five clinical quality indicators in the contract had controlled trial evidence of mortality benefit. This was combined with condition prevalence, and the differences in performance before and after contract implementation, to estimate the potential mortality reduction per indicator. Improvement was adjusted for pre-existing trends where data were available.

Results

The 2004 contract potentially reduced mortality by 11 lives per 100 000 people (lower–upper estimates 7–16) over 1 year, as performance improved from baseline to the target for full incentive payment. If all eligible patients were treated, over and above the target, 56 (29–81) lives per 100 000 might have been saved. For the 2006 contract, mortality reduction was effectively zero, because new baseline performance for a typical practice had already exceeded the target performance for full payment.

Conclusion

The contract may have delivered substantial health gain, but potential health gain was limited by performance targets for full payment being set lower than typical baseline performance. Information on both baseline performance and population health gain should inform decisions about future selection of indicators for pay-for-performance schemes, and the level of performance at which full payment is triggered.     

Recorded quality of care for depression in general practice: an observational study

Background

Depression is a leading cause of disease and disability internationally, and is responsible for many primary care consultations. Little is known about the quality of primary care for depression in the UK.

Aim

To determine the prevalence of good-quality primary care for depression, and to analyse variations in quality by patient and practice characteristics.

Design of study

Retrospective observational study.

Setting

Eighteen general practices in England.

Method

Medical records were examined for 279 patients. The percentage of eligible participants diagnosed with depression who received the care specified by each of six quality indicators in 2002 and 2004 was assessed. Associations between quality achievement and age, sex, patient deprivation score, timepoint, and practice size were estimated using logistic regression.

Results

There was very wide variation in achievement of different indicators (range 1–97%). Achievement was higher for indicators referring to treatment and follow-up than for indicators referring to history taking. Achievement of quality indicators was low overall (37%). Quality did not vary significantly by patient or practice characteristics.

Conclusion

There is substantial scope for improvement in the quality of primary care for depression, if the highest achievement rates could be matched for all indicators. Given the lack of variation by practice characteristics, system-level and educational interventions may be the best ways to improve quality. The equitable distribution of quality by patient deprivation score is an important achievement that may be challenging to maintain as quality improves.     

Patient-reported areas for quality improvement in general practice: a cross-sectional survey

Background

GPs are often a patient’s first point of contact with the health system. The increasing demands imposed on GPs may have an impact on the quality of care delivered. Patients are well placed to make judgements about aspects of care that need to be improved.

Aim

To determine whether general practice patients perceive that the care they receive is ‘patient-centred’ across eight domains of care, and to determine the association between sociodemographic, GP and practice characteristics, detection of preventive health risks, and receipt of patient-centred care.

Design and setting

Cross-sectional survey of patients attending Australian general practice clinics.

Method

Patients completed a touchscreen survey in the waiting room to rate the care received from their GP across eight domains of patient-centred care. Patients also completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and self-reported health risk factors. GPs completed a checklist for each patient asking about the presence of health risk factors.

Results

In total 1486 patients and 51 GPs participated. Overall, 83% of patients perceived that the care they received was patient-centred across all eight domains. Patients most frequently perceived the ‘access to health care when needed’ domain as requiring improvement (8.3%). Not having private health insurance and attending a practice located in a disadvantaged area were significantly associated with perceived need for improvements in care (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Patients in general practice report that accessibility is an aspect of care that could be improved. Further investigation of how indicators of lower socioeconomic status interact with the provision of patient-centred care and health outcomes is required.     

Factors associated with enablement in general practice: cross-sectional study using routinely-collected data.

BACKGROUND: Quality-improvement activities are most often focused on clinical quality indicators. However, patient evaluations are important additional indicators of the quality of general practice consultations, including measures of satisfaction or enablement (that is, the extent to which the consultation enhances the patient's feelings of confidence and ability to cope). There is limited evidence concerning factors associated with enablement in UK general practice. AIM: To identify patient and practice characteristics associated with enablement scores following general practice consultations. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cross-sectional survey using a large routinely-collected dataset of patient evaluations of general practice (190,038 individual patient responses). SETTING: A total of 1031 UK general practices. METHOD: Relationships between health, demographic factors, evaluations of general practice care, and patient self-reported enablement were estimated using multiple regression. RESULTS: The primary predictor of enablement was positive patient evaluation of the GPs' communication. Reported continuity of care accounted for a lower proportion of the variance. Of the included patient demographic variables, ethnicity was a key predictor, with patients from minority ethnic groups reporting greater enablement once other factors were controlled. CONCLUSION: The current results provide support for the construct validity of the enablement measure. However, if enablement is to become a valid and useful measure of quality, it is necessary to understand the mechanisms by which enablement is increased in certain patients and practices. Detailed qualitative research may also be required to explain the relatively high scores of ethnic minority responders, despite lower overall satisfaction scores, and to understand why some items included in the enablement measure are regarded as 'not applicable' by a substantial minority of patients.     

Quality of care provided to people with dementia: utilisation and quality of the annual dementia review in general practice

Background

Primary care services are often the main healthcare service for people with dementia; as such, good-quality care at this level is important.

Aim

To measure the quality of care provided to people with dementia in general practice using routinely collected data, and to explore associated patient and practice factors.

Design and setting

Observational, cross-sectional review of medical records from general practices (n = 52) in five primary care trusts.

Method

A total of 994 people with dementia were identified from dementia registers. An unweighted quality-of-care score was constructed using information collected in the annual dementia review, together with pharmacological management of cognitive and non-cognitive symptoms. Multilevel modelling was carried out to identify factors associated with quality-of-care scores.

Results

In total, 599 out of 745 (80%) patients with dementia had received an annual dementia review; however, a social care review or discussion with carers was evident in just 305 (51%) and 367 (61%) of those 599 cases, respectively. Despite high prevalence of vascular disease, over a quarter (n = 259, 26%) of all patients with dementia were prescribed antipsychotics; only 57% (n = 148) of these had undergone medication review in the previous 6 months. Those with vascular dementia who were registered with single-handed practices received poorer quality of care than those registered with practices that had more than one GP.

Conclusion

Although the number of people with dementia with a record of an annual dementia review is high, the quality of these reviews is suboptimal. The quality score developed in this study could be used as one source of data to identify weaknesses in practice activity that need to be corrected, and so would be of value to commissioners and regulators, as well as practices themselves.     

Primary care characteristics and population-orientated health care across Europe: an observational study

Background

The number of patients with chronic diseases is increasing which poses a challenge to healthcare organisations. A proactive, structured, and population-orientated approach is needed: the chronic care model (CCM) provides such a framework.

Aim

To assess organisational conditions for providing structured chronic care according to the CCM across different healthcare systems.

Design of study

International observational study.

Setting

A stratified sample of 315 primary care practices in 10 European countries and Israel in 2008 and 2009.

Method

Practice questionnaires and interviews. Outcome measures were mean practice scores on CCM domains per country, as a percentage of the maximum score, and the influence of practice size and urbanisation on these scores.

Results

Practice size showed large differences with the largest practices in Spain, England, Finland, and Israel. These countries, with a strong primary care orientation, had most physicians and staff involved per practice. The CCM domains ‘clinical information systems’ and ‘decision support’ had total practice means of 90%; other domains scored about 50%. Spain and England scored above average on almost all domains. Practice size and urbanisation had little impact.

Conclusion

Characteristics for chronic care delivery differed for most CCM domains. The most common characteristics related to computerisation, providing a good starting point and high potential everywhere. All countries showed room for improvement. Further research should focus on relations between practice characteristics, organisational features, including health system and primary care orientation, and outcomes. Primary care seems suited for chronic care delivery; however, a stronger primary care was associated with better scores.     

Routine mortality monitoring for detecting mass murder in UK general practice: test of effectiveness using modelling.

BACKGROUND: The Shipman Inquiry recommended mortality rate monitoring if it could be 'shown to be workable' in detecting a future mass murderer in general practice. AIM: To examine the effectiveness of cumulative sum (CUSUM) charts, cross-sectional Shewhart charts, and exponentially-weighted, moving-average control charts in mortality monitoring at practice level. DESIGN OF STUDY: Analysis of Scottish routine general practice data combined with estimation of control chart effectiveness in detecting a 'murderer' in a simulated dataset. METHOD: Practice stability was calculated from routine data to determine feasible lengths of monitoring. A simulated dataset of 405,000 'patients' was created, registered with 75 'practices' whose underlying mortality rates varied with the same distribution as case-mix-adjusted mortality in all Scottish practices. The sensitivity of each chart to detect five and 10 excess deaths was examined in repeated simulations. The sensitivity of control charts to excess deaths in simulated data, and the number of alarm signals when control charts were applied to routine data were estimated. RESULTS: Practice instability limited the length of monitoring and modelling was consequently restricted to a 3-year period. Monitoring mortality over 3 years, CUSUM charts were most sensitive but only reliably achieved >50% successful detection for 10 excess deaths per year and generated multiple false alarms (>15%). CONCLUSION: At best, mortality monitoring can act as a backstop to detect a particularly prolific serial killer when other means of detection have failed. Policy should focus on changes likely to improve detection of individual murders, such as reform of death certification and the coroner system.     

Primary care quality indicators for children: measuring quality in UK general practice

Background

Child health care is an important part of the UK general practice workload; in 2009 children aged <15 years accounted for 10.9% of consultations. However, only 1.2% of the UK’s Quality and Outcomes Framework pay-for-performance incentive points relate specifically to children.

Aim

To improve the quality of care provided for children and adolescents by defining a set of quality indicators that reflect evidence-based national guidelines and are feasible to audit using routine computerised clinical records.

Design and setting

Multi-step consensus methodology in UK general practice.

Method

Four-step development process: selection of priority issues (applying nominal group methodology), systematic review of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) clinical guidelines, translation of guideline recommendations into quality indicators, and assessment of their validity and implementation feasibility (applying consensus methodology used in selecting QOF indicators).

Results

Of the 296 national guidelines published, 48 were potentially relevant to children in primary care, but only 123 of 1863 recommendations (6.6%) met selection criteria for translation into 56 potential quality indicators. A further 13 potential indicators were articulated after review of existing quality indicators and standards. Assessment of the validity and feasibility of implementation of these 69 candidate indicators by a clinical expert group identified 35 with median scores 8 on a 9-point Likert scale. However, only seven of the 35 achieved a GRADE rating >1 (were based on more than expert opinion).

Conclusion

Producing valid primary care quality indicators for children is feasible but difficult. These indicators require piloting before wide adoption but have the potential to raise the standard of primary care for all children.     

Healthcare assistants in general practice: practical and conceptual issues of skill-mix change.

The emergence of healthcare assistants (HCAs) in general practice raises questions about roles and responsibilities, patients' acceptance, cost-effectiveness, patient safety and delegation, training and competence, workforce development, and professional identity. There has been minimal research into the role of HCAs and their experiences, as well as those of other staff working with HCAs in general practice. Lessons may be learned from their role and evidence of their effectiveness in hospital settings. Such research highlights blurred and contested role boundaries and threats to professional identity, which have implications for teamwork, quality of patient care, and patient safety. In this paper it is argued that transferability of evidence from hospital settings to the context of general practice cannot be assumed. Drawing on the limited research in general practice, the challenges and benefits of developing the HCA role in general practice are discussed. It is suggested that in the context of changing skill-mix models, viewing roles as fluid and dynamic is more helpful and reflective of individuals' experiences than endeavouring to impose fixed role boundaries. It is concluded that HCAs can make an increasingly useful contribution to the skill mix in general practice, but that more research and evaluation are needed to inform their training and development within the general practice team.     

Recorded quality of primary care for osteoarthritis: an observational study

Background

Osteoarthritis is the most common chronic disease in the UK, with greater prevalence in women, older people, and those with poorer socioeconomic status. Effective treatments are available, yet little is known about the quality of primary care for this disabling condition.

Aim

To measure the recorded quality of primary care for osteoarthritis, and assess variavariations by patient and/or practice characteristics.

Design of study

Retrospective observational study.

Setting

Eighteen general practices in England.

Method

Records of 320/393 randomly selected patients with osteoarthritis (response rate 81%) were reviewed. High-quality health care was specified by nine quality indicators. Logistic regression modelling assessed variations in quality by age, sex, deprivation, severity, time since diagnosis, and practice size.

Results

There was substantial variation in the recorded achievement of individual indicators (range 5% to 90%). The percentage of eligible patients whose records show that they received care in the form of information provision ranged from 17% to 30%. For regular assessment indicators the range was 27% to 43%, and for treatment indicators the range was 5% to 90%. Recorded achievement of quality indicators was higher in those with more severe osteoarthritis (odds ratio [OR] 1.38, 95% CI = 1.13 to 1.69) and in older patients (OR 1.14, 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.28). There were no significant variations by deprivation score.

Conclusion

This study has demonstrated the feasibility of using existing robust quality indicators to measure the quality of primary care for osteoarthritis, and has found considerable scope for improvement in the recording of high-quality care. The lack of variation between practices suggests that system-level initiatives may be needed to achieve improvement. One challenge will be to improve care for all, without losing the equitable distribution of care identified.     

Correlation between prescribing quality and pharmaceutical costs in English primary care: national cross-sectional analysis

Background

Both pharmaceutical costs and quality-indicator performance vary substantially between general practices, but little is known about the relationship between prescribing costs and quality

Aim

To measure the association between prescribing quality and pharmaceutical costs among English general practices

Design and setting

Cross-sectional observational study using data from the Quality and Outcomes Framework and the Prescribing Analysis and Cost database from all 8409 general practices in England in 2005-2006

Method

Correlation between practice achievement of 26 prescribing quality indicators in eight prescribing areas and related pharmaceutical costs was examined.

Results

There was no significant association between the overall achievement of quality indicators and related pharmaceutical costs (P= 0.399). Mean achievement of quality indicators across all eight prescribing areas was 79.0% (standard deviation 4.4%). There were small positive correlations in five prescribing areas: influenza vaccination, beta blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, lipid lowering, and antiplatelet treatment (all P<0.001). There were small negative correlations in two prescribing areas: hypertension (P<0.001) and smoking cessation (P = 0.018).

Conclusion

Correlations between prescribing quality and pharmaceutical costs were much smallerthan expected; possible explanations forthis include a substantial variation in rates of prescribing outside evidence-based protocols, and use of expensive pharmaceuticals instead of cheaper effective alternatives. There remains considerable scope for some practices to make pharmaceutical cost savings while improving quality performance. The ratio of quality scores to related pharmaceutical costs could be developed into a performance indicator     

Nursing consultations and control of diabetes in general practice: a retrospective observational study

Background

Diabetes affects around 3.6 million people in the UK. Previous research found that general practices employing more nurses delivered better diabetes care, but did not include data on individual patient characteristics or consultations received.

Aim

To examine whether the proportion of consultations with patients with diabetes provided by nurses in GP practices is associated with control of diabetes measured by levels of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c).

Design and setting

A retrospective observational study using consultation records from 319 649 patients with diabetes from 471 UK general practices from 2002 to 2011.

Method

Hierarchical multilevel models to examine associations between proportion of consultations undertaken by nurses and attaining HbA1c targets over time, controlling for case-mix and practice level factors.

Results

The proportion of consultations with nurses has increased by 20% since 2002 but patients with diabetes made fewer consultations per year in 2011 compared with 2002 (11.6 versus 16.0). Glycaemic control has improved and was more uniformly achieved in 2011 than 2002. Practices in which nurses provide a higher proportion of consultations perform no differently to those where nurse input is lower (lowest versus highest nurse contact tertile odds ratio [OR] [confidence interval {95% CI}]: HbA1c ≤53 mmol/mol (7%) 2002, 1.04 [95% CI = 0.87 to 1.25] and 2011, 0.95 [95% CI = 0.87 to 1.03]; HbA1c ≤86 mmol/mol (10%) 2002, 0.97 [95% CI = 0.73 to 1.29] and 2011, 0.95 [95% CI = 0.86 to 1.04]).

Conclusion

Practices that primarily use GPs to deliver diabetes care could release significant resources with no adverse effect by switching their services towards nurse-led care.     

Assessing depression severity using the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework depression indicators: a systematic review

BackgroundDepression is a major cause of chronic ill-health and is managed in primary care. Indicators on depression severity assessment were introduced into the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) in 2006 and 2009. QOF is a pay-for-performance scheme and indicators should have evidence to support their use; potential unintended consequences should also have been considered.AimTo review the effectiveness of routine assessment of depression severity using structured tools in primary care, and to determine the views of GPs and patients regarding their use.DesignSystematic review.MethodStudies were identified by searching electronic databases; study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment were carried out by one reviewer, with checks from other authors and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) tables completed for included effectiveness studies.ResultsEight studies met the eligibility criteria. There was very low-quality evidence that assessing severity in a structured way at diagnosis using a validated tool led to interventions that were appropriate to the severity of depression. Patients and GPs had different perceptions of the assessment of depression at diagnosis, with patients being more positive. GPs highlighted unintended consequences. There was low-quality evidence that structured assessment at follow-up led to increased rates of remission and response, but changes to management were not seen. Patients used this assessment to measure their own response to treatment.ConclusionAny estimate of the effect of structured assessment of depression severity in UK general practice is uncertain. GPs consider routine use of questionnaires as incentivised by the QOF has unintended consequences, which could adversely affect patient care.     

Refugee experiences of general practice in countries of resettlement: a literature review

Background

Refugees and asylum seekers often struggle to use general practice services in resettlement countries.

Aim

To describe and analyse the literature on the experiences of refugees and asylum seekers using general practice services in countries of resettlement.

Design and setting

Literature review using systematic search and narrative data extraction and synthesis methodologies. International, peer-reviewed literature published in English language between 1990 and 2013.

Method

Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CSA Sociological Abstracts, and CINAHL databases were searched using the terms: refugee, asylum seeker, experience, perception, doctor, physician, and general practitioner. Titles, abstracts and full texts were reviewed and were critically appraised. Narrative themes describing the refugee or asylum seeker’s personal experiences of general practice services were identified, coded, and analysed.

Results

From 8722 papers, 85 were fully reviewed and 23 included. These represented the experiences of approximately 864 individuals using general practice services across 11 countries. Common narrative themes that emerged were: difficulties accessing general practice services, language barriers, poor doctor–patient relationships, and problems with the cultural acceptability of medical care.

Conclusion

The difficulties refugees and asylum seekers experience accessing and using general practice services could be addressed by providing practical support for patients to register, make appointments, and attend services, and through using interpreters. Clinicians should look beyond refugee stereotypes to focus on the needs and expectations of the individual. They should provide clear explanations about unfamiliar clinical processes and treatments while offering timely management.     

Implications of comorbidity for primary care costs in the UK: a retrospective observational study

Background

Comorbidity is increasingly common in primary care. The cost implications for patient care and budgetary management are unclear.

Aim

To investigate whether caring for patients with specific disease combinations increases or decreases primary care costs compared with treating separate patients with one condition each.

Design

Retrospective observational study using data on 86 100 patients in the General Practice Research Database.

Method

Annual primary care cost was estimated for each patient including consultations, medication, and investigations. Patients with comorbidity were defined as those with a current diagnosis of more than one chronic condition in the Quality and Outcomes Framework. Multiple regression modelling was used to identify, for three age groups, disease combinations that increase (cost-increasing) or decrease (cost-limiting) cost compared with treating each condition separately.

Results

Twenty per cent of patients had at least two chronic conditions. All conditions were found to be both cost-increasing and cost-limiting when co-occurring with other conditions except dementia, which is only cost-limiting. Depression is the most important cost-increasing condition when co-occurring with a range of conditions. Hypertension is cost-limiting, particularly when co-occurring with other cardiovascular conditions.

Conclusion

Three categories of comorbidity emerge, those that are: cost-increasing, mainly due to a combination of depression with physical comorbidity; cost-limiting because treatment for the conditions overlap; and cost-limiting for no apparent reason but possibly because of inadequate care. These results can contribute to efficient and effective management of chronic conditions in primary care.     

Type and accuracy of sphygmomanometers in primary care: a cross-sectional observational study

Background

Previous studies identified worrying levels of sphygmomanometer inaccuracy and have not been repeated in the era of digital measurement of blood pressure

Aim

To establish the type and accuracy of sphygmomanometers in current use

Design and setting

Cross-sectional, observational study in 38 Oxfordshire primary care practices

Method

Sphygmomanometers were evaluated between 50 and 250 mmHg, using Omron PA350 or Scandmed 950831-2 pressure meters.

Results

Six hundred and four sphygmomanometers were identified: 323 digital (53%), 192 aneroid (32%), 79 mercury (13%), and 10 hybrid (2%) devices. Of these, 584 (97%) could be fully tested. Overall, 503/584 (86%) were within 3 mmHg of the reference, 77/584 (13%) had one or more errorof 4-9 mmHg, and 4/584 (<1%) had one or more errorof more than 10 mmHg. Mercury (71/75, 95%) and digital (272/308, 88%) devices were more likely to be within 3 mmHg of the reference standard than aneroid models (150/191, 78%) (Fisher''s exact test P = 0.001). Donated aneroid devices from the pharmaceutical industry performed significantly worse: 10/23 (43%) within 3 mmHg of standard compared to 140/168 (83%) aneroid models from recognised manufacturers (Fisher''s exact test P<0.001). No significant difference was found in performance between manufacturers within each device type, for either aneroid (Fisher''s exact test P = 0.96) or digital (Fisher''s exact test P = 0.7) devices.

Conclusion

Digital sphygmomanometers have largely replaced mercury models in primary care and have equivalent accuracy. Aneroid devices have higherfailure rates than other device types; this appears to be largely accounted forby models from indiscernible manufacturers. Given the availability of inexpensive and accurate digital models, GPs could consider replacing aneroid devices with digital equivalents, especially for home visiting.     

Patient experience and the role of postgraduate GP training: a cross-sectional analysis of national Patient Survey data in England

Background

Quality indicators for primary care focus predominantly on the public health model and organisational measures. Patient experience is an important dimension of quality. Accreditation for GP training practices requires demonstration of a series of attributes including patient-centred care.

Aim

The national GP Patient Survey (GPPS) was used to determine the characteristics of general practices scoring highly in responses relating to the professional skills and characteristics of doctors. Specifically, to determine whether active participation in postgraduate GP training was associated with more positive experiences of care.

Design and setting

Retrospective cross-sectional study in general practices in England.

Method

Data were obtained from the national QOF dataset for England, 2011/12 (8164 general practices); the GPPS in 2012 (2.7 million questionnaires in England; response rate 36%); general practice and demographic characteristics. Sensitivity analyses included local data validated by practice inspections. Outcome measures: multilevel regression models adjusted for clustering.

Results

GP training practice status (29% of practices) was a significant predictor of positive GPPS responses to all questions in the ‘doctor care’ (n = 6) and ‘overall satisfaction’ (n = 2) domains but not to any of the ‘nurse care’ or ‘out-of-hours’ domain questions. The findings were supported by the sensitivity analyses. Other positive determinants were: smaller practice and individual GP list sizes, more older patients, lower social deprivation and fewer ethnic minority patients.

Conclusion

Based on GPPS responses, doctors in GP training practices appeared to offer more patient-centred care with patients reporting more positively on attributes of doctors such as ‘listening’ or ‘care and concern’.     

Achievement of cholesterol targets and prescribing of higher-cost statins: a cross-sectional study in general practice

Background

There is conflicting evidence as to whether achievement of cholesterol targets at the population level is dependent on the choice and cost of statin.

Aim

To investigate the practice-level relationship between cholesterol quality indicators in patients with heart disease, stroke, and diabetes and prescribing of low-cost statins.

Design and setting

Correlations and linear regression modelling of retrospective cross-sectional practice-level data with potential explanatory variables in 7909 (96.4%) general practices in England in 2008–2009.

Method

Quality indicator data were obtained from the Information Centre and prescribing data from the NHS Business Authority. A ‘cholesterol quality indicator’ score was constructed by dividing the numbers of patients achieving the target for cholesterol control of ≤5 mmol/l in stroke, diabetes, and heart disease by the numbers on each register. A ‘low-cost statin’ ratio score was constructed by dividing the numbers of defined daily doses of simvastatin and pravastatin by the total numbers of defined daily doses of statins.

Results

Simvastatin accounted for 83.3% (standard deviation [SD] = 15.7%) of low-cost statins prescribed and atorvastatin accounted for 85.7% (SD = 14.8%) of high-cost statins prescribed. The mean cholesterol score was 73.7% (SD = 6.0%). Practices using a higher proportion of the low-cost statins were less successful in achieving cholesterol targets. An increase of 10% in the prescribing of low-cost statins was associated with a decrease of 0.46% in the cholesterol quality indicator score (95% confidence interval = –0.54% to –0.38%, P<0.001).

Conclusion

Greater use of low-cost statins was associated with a small reduction in cholesterol control.     

Care plans and care planning in the management of long-term conditions in the UK: a controlled prospective cohort study

Background

In the UK, the use of care planning and written care plans has been proposed to improve the management of long-term conditions, yet there is limited evidence concerning their uptake and benefits.

Aim

To explore the implementation of care plans and care planning in the UK and associations with the process and outcome of care.

Design and setting

A controlled prospective cohort study among two groups of patients with long-term conditions who were similar in demographic and clinical characteristics, but who were registered with general practices varying in their implementation of care plans and care planning.

Method

Implementation of care plans and care planning in general practice was assessed using the 2009–2010 GP Patient Survey, and relationships with patient outcomes (self-management and vitality) were examined using multilevel, mixed effects linear regression modelling.

Results

The study recruited 38 practices and 2439 patients. Practices in the two groups (high and low users of written documents) were similar in structural and population characteristics. Patients in the two groups of practices were similar in demographics and baseline health. Patients did demonstrate significant differences in reported experiences of care planning, although the differences were modest. Very few patients in the cohort reported a written plan that could be confirmed. Analysis of outcomes suggested that most patients show limited change over time in vitality and self-management. Variation in the use of care plans at the practice level was very limited and not related to patient outcomes over time.

Conclusion

The use of written care plans in patients with long-term conditions is uncommon and unlikely to explain a substantive amount of variation in the process and outcome of care. More proactive efforts at implementation may be required to provide a rigorous test of the potential of care plans and care planning.     

The relationship between social deprivation and the quality of primary care: a national survey using indicators from the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework

BACKGROUND: The existence of health inequalities between least and most socially deprived areas is now well established. AIM: To use Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) indicators to explore the characteristics of primary care in deprived communities. DESIGN OF STUDY: Two-year study. SETTING: Primary care in England. METHOD: QOF data were obtained for each practice in England in 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 and linked with census derived social deprivation data (Index of Multiple Deprivation scores 2004), national urbanicity scores and a database of practice characteristics. Data were available for 8480 practices in 2004-2005 and 8264 practices in 2005-2006. Comparisons were made between practices in the least and most deprived quintiles. RESULTS: The difference in mean total QOF score between practices in least and most deprived quintiles was 64.5 points in 2004-2005 (mean score, all practices, 959.9) and 30.4 in 2005-2006 (mean, 1012.6). In 2005-2006, the QOF indicators displaying the largest differences between least and most deprived quintiles were: recall of patients not attending appointments for injectable neuroleptics (79 versus 58%, respectively), practices opening > or =45 hours/week (90 versus 74%), practices conducting > or = 12 significant event audits in previous 3 years (93 versus 81%), proportion of epileptics who were seizure free > or = 12 months (77 versus 65%) and proportion of patients taking lithium with serum lithium within therapeutic range (90 versus 78%). Geographical differences were less in group and training practices. CONCLUSIONS: Overall differences between primary care quality indicators in deprived and prosperous communities were small. However, shortfalls in specific indicators, both clinical and non-clinical, suggest that focused interventions could be applied to improve the quality of primary care in deprived areas.