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

Strong, Mark; South, Gail; Carlisle, Robin

doi:10.1186/1472-6963-9-108

Cited by 20 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Hillman et al (1998) and Hillman et al (1999) do not observe a significant effect of P4P incentives coupled with performance feedback on physician compliance with cancer screening and pediatric preventive care guidelines in a U.S. Medicaid Health Maintenance Organization (HMO). A study by Strong et al (2009) reports that the U.K. Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), the most comprehensive P4P program to date, does not lead to an improvement in the quality of ambulatory care.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several authors do not find any significant effect of P4P incentives on physician behavior and quality of care (e.g., Hutchison et al 1996;Hillman et al 1998;Strong et al 2009). The bulk of the existing research, however, documents partial effects in that P4P incentives may lead to modest improvements in some but not all of the evaluated quality measures (e.g., Rosenthal et al 2005;Young et al 2007;Glickman et al 2007;Campbell et al 2009;Li et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Money Talks - Paying Physicians for Performance

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Money Talks - Paying Physicians for Performance

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Used alongside demographic data, the indicators can measure practice performance, identify areas for development and assist sharing of best practice 23. The indicators often increase the quantity of service provision, but not always the quality 24. While offering great potential, quality indicators have not been comprehensively evaluated in dentistry.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The INCENTIVE protocol: an evaluation of the organisation and delivery of NHS dental healthcare to patients—innovation in thecommissioning of primary dental care service delivery and organisation in the UK

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionIn England, in 2006, new dental contracts devolved commissioning of dental services locally to Primary Care Trusts to meet the needs of their local population. The new national General Dental Services contracts (nGDS) were based on payment for Units of Dental Activity (UDAs) awarded in three treatment bands based on complexity of care. Recently, contract currency in UK dentistry is evolving from UDAs based on volume and case complexity towards ‘blended contracts’ that include incentives linked with key performance indicators such as quality and improved health outcome. Overall, evidence of the effectiveness of incentive-driven contracting of health providers is still emerging. The INCENTIVE Study aims to evaluate a blended contract model (incentive-driven) compared to traditional nGDS contracts on dental service delivery in practices in West Yorkshire, England.Methods and analysisThe INCENTIVE model uses a mixed methods approach to comprehensively evaluate a new incentive-driven model of NHS dental service delivery. The study includes 6 dental surgeries located across three newly commissioned dental practices (blended contract) and three existing traditional practices (nGDS contracts). The newly commissioned practices have been matched to traditional practices by deprivation index, age profile, ethnicity, size of practice and taking on new patients. The study consists of three interlinked work packages: a qualitative study to explore stakeholder perspectives of the new service delivery model; an effectiveness study to assess the INCENTIVE model in reducing the risk of and amount of dental disease and enhance oral health-related quality of life in patients; and an economic study to assess cost-effectiveness of the INCENTIVE model in relation to clinical status and oral health-related quality of life.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by NRES Committee London, Bromley. The results of this study will be disseminated at national and international conferences and in international journals.

show abstract

“…Even though UPLIFT had more GOLD stage 2 participants, there were still fewer of these than in a typical primary care population. 10 This may also have an effect on the applicability or generalisability of the study resultsparticularly in general practice.…”

Section: Are Trial Participants Similar To the People You Treat?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons from the major studies in COPD: problems and pitfalls in translating research evidence into practice

Halpin

2010

Primary Care Respiratory Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryTranslating the growing evidence base on COPD management into practice can be challenging and understanding the strengths and weakness of published studies is crucial. Studies should conform to the standards of CONSORT statement; they should be sufficiently powered, participants should be randomised, there should be assignment concealment, and the outcome measures and analyses should be decided in advance.The interpretation of the results may be affected by age and severity inclusion criteria for the study and the exclusion of patients with co-morbid illnesses. Whether previous medication is continued or stopped can affect the interpretation of the results. Secondary analyses in sub-groups should be viewed with caution unless pre-specified and accommodated in the trial design and power calculations. Real world observational studies may be confounded by non-randomisation of participants but can sometimes yield valuable insights.The way in which the results are presented can influence their interpretation and their magnitude with respect to minimal important differences as well as statistical significance is important.Research studies help formulate management algorithms but often the questions they address are too specific to allow evidence-based sequencing of therapies.

show abstract

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

Cited by 20 publications

References 8 publications

Money Talks - Paying Physicians for Performance

Money Talks - Paying Physicians for Performance

The INCENTIVE protocol: an evaluation of the organisation and delivery of NHS dental healthcare to patients—innovation in thecommissioning of primary dental care service delivery and organisation in the UK

Lessons from the major studies in COPD: problems and pitfalls in translating research evidence into practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About