选择退出 "质量与成果框架"(QOF)及其对医疗机构绩效的影响

IF 2.2 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Public Health in Practice Pub Date : 2024-06-24 DOI:10.1016/j.puhip.2024.100526
V. Tzortziou Brown, J. Hayre, J. Ford
{"title":"选择退出 \"质量与成果框架\"(QOF)及其对医疗机构绩效的影响","authors":"V. Tzortziou Brown,&nbsp;J. Hayre,&nbsp;J. Ford","doi":"10.1016/j.puhip.2024.100526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Financial incentives are being increasingly adopted to help improve standards of care within general practice. However their effects on care quality are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of practices opting out of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), a financial incentive scheme in UK general practice.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>A retrospective before and after study of all practices in Tower Hamlets, east London.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Practices were given an option by local commissioners of opting out of QOF without a financial penalty and instead opting for a locally designed financial incentive scheme that promoted more holistic care. We compared those practices which opted out of QOF to those which continued. We used national, publicly available QOF achievement data from 2016/17 and 2017/18. We undertook a sub-analysis of 16 QOF indicators to better understand the impact of the intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 36 practices in Tower Hamlets, 7 decided to continue with QOF and 29 opted out. The intervention resulted in a small but statistically significant reduction in the total QOF achievement scores of practices which opted out of QOF. The sub-analysis of 16 QOF indicators showed statistically significant reductions in most of achievement scores net of exceptions for the practices that opted out. The differences in performance between the two cohorts of practices became smaller when exceptions were included.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The removal of QOF financial incentives can result in a reduction in achievement of QOF-related indicators but the size of the effect seems to depend on the QOF exception rates. An alternative incentive scheme that promotes a more holistic approach to care seems to be welcomed by general practices.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34141,"journal":{"name":"Public Health in Practice","volume":"8 ","pages":"Article 100526"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666535224000636/pdfft?md5=f454dff9ab652d528f3df093ced8ec7c&pid=1-s2.0-S2666535224000636-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Opting out of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) and impact on practices’ performance\",\"authors\":\"V. Tzortziou Brown,&nbsp;J. Hayre,&nbsp;J. Ford\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.puhip.2024.100526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Financial incentives are being increasingly adopted to help improve standards of care within general practice. However their effects on care quality are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of practices opting out of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), a financial incentive scheme in UK general practice.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>A retrospective before and after study of all practices in Tower Hamlets, east London.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Practices were given an option by local commissioners of opting out of QOF without a financial penalty and instead opting for a locally designed financial incentive scheme that promoted more holistic care. We compared those practices which opted out of QOF to those which continued. We used national, publicly available QOF achievement data from 2016/17 and 2017/18. We undertook a sub-analysis of 16 QOF indicators to better understand the impact of the intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 36 practices in Tower Hamlets, 7 decided to continue with QOF and 29 opted out. The intervention resulted in a small but statistically significant reduction in the total QOF achievement scores of practices which opted out of QOF. The sub-analysis of 16 QOF indicators showed statistically significant reductions in most of achievement scores net of exceptions for the practices that opted out. The differences in performance between the two cohorts of practices became smaller when exceptions were included.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The removal of QOF financial incentives can result in a reduction in achievement of QOF-related indicators but the size of the effect seems to depend on the QOF exception rates. An alternative incentive scheme that promotes a more holistic approach to care seems to be welcomed by general practices.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34141,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Health in Practice\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100526\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666535224000636/pdfft?md5=f454dff9ab652d528f3df093ced8ec7c&pid=1-s2.0-S2666535224000636-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Health in Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666535224000636\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666535224000636","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景越来越多的人采用经济激励措施来帮助提高全科医疗服务的标准。然而,这些措施对医疗质量的影响尚不明确。本研究旨在评估选择退出英国全科医疗财务激励计划--"质量与成果框架"(QOF)的医疗机构所产生的影响。研究设计对伦敦东部哈姆雷特塔区的所有医疗机构进行了一项前后回顾性研究。我们对那些选择退出 QOF 的医疗机构和那些继续执行 QOF 的医疗机构进行了比较。我们使用了2016/17年度和2017/18年度全国公开的QOF成绩数据。我们对16项QOF指标进行了子分析,以更好地了解干预措施的影响。结果在塔哈姆雷特的36家诊所中,7家决定继续实施QOF,29家选择退出。干预措施导致选择退出 QOF 的医疗机构的 QOF 总成绩得分略有下降,但在统计学上具有显著意义。对 16 项 QOF 指标的子分析表明,除去例外情况,选择退出的医疗机构的大部分绩效得分在统计上都有显著下降。结论取消QOF财政激励措施会导致QOF相关指标的成绩下降,但影响的大小似乎取决于QOF的异常率。促进更全面护理方法的替代激励计划似乎受到了全科医生的欢迎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Opting out of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) and impact on practices’ performance

Background

Financial incentives are being increasingly adopted to help improve standards of care within general practice. However their effects on care quality are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of practices opting out of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), a financial incentive scheme in UK general practice.

Study design

A retrospective before and after study of all practices in Tower Hamlets, east London.

Methods

Practices were given an option by local commissioners of opting out of QOF without a financial penalty and instead opting for a locally designed financial incentive scheme that promoted more holistic care. We compared those practices which opted out of QOF to those which continued. We used national, publicly available QOF achievement data from 2016/17 and 2017/18. We undertook a sub-analysis of 16 QOF indicators to better understand the impact of the intervention.

Results

Of the 36 practices in Tower Hamlets, 7 decided to continue with QOF and 29 opted out. The intervention resulted in a small but statistically significant reduction in the total QOF achievement scores of practices which opted out of QOF. The sub-analysis of 16 QOF indicators showed statistically significant reductions in most of achievement scores net of exceptions for the practices that opted out. The differences in performance between the two cohorts of practices became smaller when exceptions were included.

Conclusions

The removal of QOF financial incentives can result in a reduction in achievement of QOF-related indicators but the size of the effect seems to depend on the QOF exception rates. An alternative incentive scheme that promotes a more holistic approach to care seems to be welcomed by general practices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Public Health in Practice
Public Health in Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
117
审稿时长
71 days
期刊最新文献
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the dispensing of systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) in Ireland: A population based study Association between child marriage and high blood glucose level in women: A birth cohort analysis Reaching national Covid-19 vaccination targets whilst decreasing inequalities in vaccine uptake: Public health teams' challenges in supporting disadvantaged populations Syndemic geographic patterns of cancer risk in a health-deprived area of England Young, deprived women are more at risk of testing positive for Chlamydia trachomatis: Results from a cross-sectional multicentre study in French health examination centres
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1