The UK quality and outcomes framework pay-for-performance scheme and spirometry: rewarding quality or just quantity? A cross-sectional study in Rotherham, UK

Background: Accurate spirometry is important in the management of COPD. The UK Quality and Outcomes Framework pay-for-performance scheme for general practitioners includes spirometry related indicators within its COPD domain. It is not known whether high achievement against QOF spirometry indicators is associated with spirometry to BTS standards. Methods: Data were obtained from the records of 3,217 patients randomly sampled from 5,649 patients with COPD in 38 general practices in Rotherham, UK. Severity of airflow obstruction was categorised by FEV1 (% predicted) according to NICE guidelines. This was compared with clinician recorded COPD severity. The proportion of patients whose spirometry met BTS standards was calculated in each practice using a random sub-sample of 761 patients. The Spearman rank correlation between practice level QOF spirometry achievement and performance against BTS spirometry standards was calculated. Results: Spirometry as assessed by clinical records was to BTS standards in 31% of cases (range at practice level 0% to 74%). The categorisation of airflow obstruction according to the most recent spirometry results did not agree well with the clinical categorisation of COPD recorded in the notes (Cohen's kappa = 0.34, 0.30 - 0.38). 12% of patients on COPD registers had FEV1 (% predicted) results recorded that did not support the diagnosis of COPD. There was no association between quality, as measured by adherence to BTS spirometry standards, and either QOF COPD9 achievement (Spearman's rho = -0.11), or QOF COPD10 achievement (rho = 0.01). Conclusion: The UK Quality and Outcomes Framework currently assesses the quantity, but not the quality of spirometry

Design choices made by target users for a pay-for-performance program in primary care: an action research approach

Contains fulltext : 110832.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: International interest in pay-for-performance (P4P) initiatives to improve quality of health care is growing. Current programs vary in the methods of performance measurement, appraisal and reimbursement. One may assume that involvement of health care professionals in the goal setting and methods of quality measurement and subsequent payment schemes may enhance their commitment to and motivation for P4P programs and therefore the impact of these programs. We developed a P4P program in which the target users were involved in decisions about the P4P methods. METHODS: For the development of the P4P program a framework was used which distinguished three main components: performance measurement, appraisal and reimbursement. Based on this framework design choices were discussed in two panels of target users using an adapted Delphi procedure. The target users were 65 general practices and two health insurance companies in the South of the Netherlands. RESULTS: Performance measurement was linked to the Dutch accreditation program based on three domains (clinical care, practice management and patient experience). The general practice was chosen as unit of assessment. Relative standards were set at the 25th percentile of group performance. The incentive for clinical care was set twice as high as the one for practice management and patient experience. Quality scores were to be calculated separately for all three domains, and for both the quality level and the improvement of performance. The incentive for quality level was set thrice as high as the one for the improvement of performance. For reimbursement, quality scores were divided into seven levels. A practice with a quality score in the lowest group was not supposed to receive a bonus. The additional payment grew proportionally for each extra group. The bonus aimed at was on average 5% to 10% of the practice income. CONCLUSIONS: Designing a P4P program for primary care with involvement of the target users gave us an insight into their motives, which can help others who need to discuss similar programs. The resulting program is in line with target users' views and assessments of relevance and applicability. This may enhance their commitment to the program as was indicated by the growing number of voluntary participants after a successfully performed field test during the procedure. The elements of our framework can be very helpful for others who are developing or evaluating a P4P program

Rational development and application of biomarkers in the field of autoimmunity: A conceptual framework guiding clinicians and researchers.

Clear guidance is needed in the development and implementation of laboratory biomarkers in medicine. So far, no standardized phased approach is established that would pilot researchers and clinicians in this process. This leads to often incompletely validated biomarkers, which can bear the consequence of wrong applications, misinterpretation and inadequate management in the clinical context. In this conceptual article, we describe a stepwise approach to develop and comprehensively validate laboratory biomarkers. We will delineate basic steps including technical performance, pre-analytical issues, and biological variation, as well as advanced aspects of biomarker utility comprising interpretability, diagnostic and prognostic accuracy, and health-care outcomes. These aspects will be illustrated by using well-known examples from the field of immunology. The application of this conceptual framework will guide researchers in conducting meaningful projects to develop and evaluate biomarkers for the use in clinical practice. Furthermore, clinicians will be able to adequately interpret pre-clinical and clinical diagnostic literature and rationally apply biomarkers in clinical practice. Improvement in the implementation and application of biomarkers might relevantly change the management and outcomes of our patients for the better

Developing a new clinical governance framework for chronic diseases in primary care: an umbrella review

OBJECTIVES: Our goal is to conceptualise a clinical governance framework for the effective management of chronic diseases in the primary care setting, which will facilitate a reorganisation of healthcare services that systematically improves their performance. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Chronic Care Model by Wagner et aland Clinical Governance statement by Scally et alwere taken for reference. Each was reviewed, including their various components. We then conceptualised a new framework, merging the relevant aspects of both. INTERVENTIONS: We conducted an umbrella review of all systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group to identify organisational interventions in primary care with demonstrated evidence of efficacy. RESULTS: All primary healthcare systems should be patient-centred. Interventions for patients and their families should focus on their values; on clinical, professional and institutional integration and finally on accountability to patients, peers and society at large. These interventions should be shaped by an approach to their clinical management that achieves the best clinical governance, which includes quality assurance, risk management, technology assessment, management of patient satisfaction and patient empowerment and engagement. This approach demands the implementation of a system of organisational, functional and professional management based on a population health needs assessment, resource management, evidence-based and patient-oriented research, professional education, team building and information and communication technologies that support the delivery system. All primary care should be embedded in and founded on an active partnership with the society it serves. CONCLUSIONS: A framework for clinical governance will promote an integrated effort to bring together all related activities, melding environmental, administrative, support and clinical elements to ensure a coordinated and integrated approach that sustains the provision of better care for chronic conditions in primary care setting

Rheumatology occupational therapy-led fibromyalgia self- management education using motivational interviewing and mindfulness based cognitive therapy : a new approach

Fibromyalgia is a chronic musculoskeletal pain syndrome, which significantly affects patients’ quality of life. EULAR revised recommendations for the management of Fibromyalgia suggests non-pharmacological therapies and patient education should be treatment priority. This puts Rheumatology Occupational Therapists in an important role on the patients’ journey to self-management. This article reports on a new treatment approach in Rheumatology Occupational Therapy-led Fibromyalgia Self-Management Education (FSME), which incorporates Motivational Interviewing, and Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy approaches within the Canadian Practice Process Framework. The Fibromyalgia self-management education programme was devised and delivered by an Advanced Clinical Specialist Occupational Therapist using a comprehensive literature review of the evidence base. The evaluation of the self-management education programme included the Revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire as a condition specific outcome measure, the 5 Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire-Short Form to measure the effectiveness of the Mindfulness training on patient’s thought patterns, and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure to evaluate the impact of the occupational therapy intervention on treatment goals. Preliminary results of the clinical practice evaluation suggests that Rheumatology Occupational Therapy-led FSME is highly effective in achieving health behaviour change, shift in patients’ awareness and reducing relapse in the long-term

Framework for primary care organizations: the importance of a structural domain

Purpose. Conceptual frameworks for primary care have evolved over the last 40 years, yet little attention has been paid to the environmental, structural and organizational factors that facilitate or moderate service delivery. Since primary care is now of more interest to policy makers, it is important that they have a comprehensive and balanced conceptual framework to facilitate their understanding and appreciation. We present a conceptual framework for primary care originally developed to guide the measurement of the performance of primary care organizations within the context of a large mixed-method evaluation of four types of models of primary care in Ontario, Canada. Methods. The framework was developed following an iterative process that combined expert consultation and group meet-ings with a narrative review of existing frameworks, as well as trends in health management and organizational theory. Results. Our conceptual framework for primary care has two domains: structural and performance. The structural domain describes the health care system, practice context and organization of the practice in which any primary care organization operates. The performance domain includes features of health care service delivery and technical quality of clinical care. Conclusion. As primary care evolves through demonstration projects and reformed delivery models, it is important to evalu-ate its structural and organizational features as these are likely to have a significant impact on performance

From Data to Decision: An Implementation Model for the Use of Evidence-based Medicine, Data Analytics, and Education in Transfusion Medicine Practice

Healthcare in the United States is underperforming despite record increases in spending. The causes are as myriad and complex as the suggested solutions. It is increasingly important to carefully assess the appropriateness and cost-effectiveness of treatments especially the most resource-consuming clinical interventions. Healthcare reimbursement models are evolving from fee-for-service to outcome-based payment. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act has added new incentives to address some of the cost, quality, and access issues related to healthcare, making the use of healthcare data and evidence-based decision-making essential strategies. However, despite the great promise of these strategies, the transition to data-driven, evidence-based medical practice is complex and faces many challenges. This study aims to bridge the gaps that exist between data, knowledge, and practice in a healthcare setting through the use of a comprehensive framework to address the administrative, cultural, clinical, and technical issues that make the implementation and sustainability of an evidence-based program and utilization of healthcare data so challenging. The study focuses on promoting evidence-based medical practice by leveraging a performance management system, targeted education, and data analytics to improve outcomes and control costs. The framework was implemented and validated in transfusion medicine practice. Transfusion is one of the top ten coded hospital procedures in the United States. Unfortunately, the costs of transfusion are underestimated and the benefits to patients are overestimated. The particular aim of this study was to reduce practice inconsistencies in red blood cell transfusion among hospitalists in a large urban hospital using evidence-based guidelines, a performance management system, recurrent reporting of practice-specific information, focused education, and data analytics in a continuous feedback mechanism to drive appropriate decision-making prior to the decision to transfuse and prior to issuing the blood component. The research in this dissertation provides the foundation for implementation of an integrated framework that proved to be effective in encouraging evidence-based best practices among hospitalists to improve quality and lower costs of care. What follows is a discussion of the essential components of the framework, the results that were achieved and observations relative to next steps a learning healthcare organization would consider

Identifying barriers and facilitators to improving prehospital care of asthma: views of ambulance clinicians

Background: In 2008/09 there were nearly 80,000 emergency hospital admissions for asthma. Current UK guidelines emphasise the importance of evidence-based prehospital assessment and treatment of asthma for improving patient outcomes and reducing hospitalisation, morbidity and mortality. National benchmarking of ambulance clinical performance indicators for asthma has revealed important unexplained variations in care across ambulance services. Little research has been undertaken to understand the reasons for poor levels of care. Objective: The aim of this study was to gather data on ambulance clinicians’ perceptions and beliefs around prevailing and best practice for management of asthma. This was used to identify the factors which prevent or enable better asthma care in ambulance services. Methods: We used a phenomenological qualitative approach, which addresses how individuals use their experiences to make sense of their world, focusing on participants’ lived experiences of care delivery for asthma. We used focus groups of ambulance clinicians to gather data on barriers and facilitators to better asthma care. Recordings and notes were taken, transcribed and then analysed using QSR NVivo 8. A coding framework was developed based on a priori concepts but with emergent themes added during the analysis. Results: Two focus groups were conducted with eight and five participants respectively. A number of preliminary themes and subthemes were identified. The study identified issues relating to clarity of ambulance guidelines, conflicts between training and guidance, misconceptions about the importance of objective assessment and over reliance on non-objective assessment. Some practitioners believed that hospital staff were not interested in prehospital peak flow assessments. Conclusion: Our findings will inform improved systems of care for asthma and the effect on indicators will be measured using time series methods. This approach could be used more widely to improve management of specific clinical conditions where quality of care is demonstrated to be suboptimal

Assessment of General Practitioners' Performance in Daily Practice

The EURACT Performance Agenda (EUPA) of the European Academy of Teachers in General Practice/Family Medicine (EURACT) is the third paper in a row following the European Definition of General Practice/Family Medicine (WONCA Europe) in 2002 which identified 6 core competencies and 11 abilities every general practitioner (GP) should master, and the EURACT Educational Agenda in 2005 which provided a framework to teach the core competencies by setting learning aims and monitoring their achievement. Performance (in contrast to competence) is understood as the level of actual performance in clinical care and communication with patients in daily practice. Small groups of EURACT Council members from 40 European countries have discussed and developed EUPA since 2007. EUPA is a general, uniform and basic agenda of performance elements every GP masters in daily practice, applicable and adaptable to different countries with different systems. It deals with the process and result of actual work in daily practice, not with a teaching/learning situation. EUPA discusses in depth the psychometrics and edumetrics of performance assessment. Case vignettes of abilities in GPs’ daily practice illustrate performance and its assessment in every chapter. Examples of common assessment tools are workplace-based assessment by a peer, feedback from patients or staff and audit of medical records. EUPA can help to shape various performance assessment activities held locally in general practice/family medicine, e. g. in continuing professional development cycles, re-certification/re-accreditation/licensing procedures, peer hospitation programmes and practice audit programmes in quality management. It can give orientation for self-assessment for reflective practitioners in their continuing professional development. The EURACT Performance Agenda (EUPA) encourages general practitioners to initialize performance agendas adapted to their national health system to further strengthen the role of general practice/family medicine in their country

Soft governance, restratification and the 2004 general medical services contract:the case of UK primary care organisations and general practice teams

In the UK National Health Service, primary care organisation (PCO) managers have traditionally relied on the soft leadership of general practitioners based on professional self-regulation rather than direct managerial control. The 2004 general medical services contract (nGMS) represented a significant break from this arrangement by introducing new performance management mechanisms for PCO managers to measure and improve general practice work. This article examines the impact of nGMS on the governance of UK general practice by PCO managers through a qualitative analysis of data from an empirical study in four UK PCOs and eight general practices, drawing on Hood's four-part governance framework. Two hybrids emerged: (i) PCO managers emphasised a hybrid of oversight, competition (comptrol) and peer-based mutuality by granting increased support, guidance and autonomy to compliant practices; and (ii) practices emphasised a broad acceptance of increased PCO oversight of clinical work that incorporated a restratified elite of general practice clinical peers at both PCO and practice levels. Given the increased international focus on the quality, safety and efficiency in primary care, a key issue for PCOs and practices will be to achieve an effective, contextually appropriate balance between the counterposing governance mechanisms of peer-led mutuality and externally led comptrol