How do we compare? Applying UK pay for performance indicators to an Australian general practice

Adrian Elliot-Smith, M. A J Morgan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: United Kingdom general practitioners receive payment based on their performance in multiple clinical indicators. We set out to apply the same indicators in an Australian general practice to benchmark our performance and to see how much work was required to obtain the data. Methods: Clinical indicators for the 2008-2009 UK Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) cycle were examined and achievement levels measured in a large rural Australian general practice, mainly by computer searching of the clinical database. Results: Outcome measures were obtainable for 79 out of 80 indicators. Manual perusal of computer records was required for 16 indicators. Data collection takes approximately 130 hours. The Australian general practice achieved 66% of available pay for performance points compared to the UK average of 97%. Discussion: United Kingdom QOF clinical data is obtainable relatively easily in a well computerised Australian rural general practice. The exercise identified significant areas in which clinical performance could be improved.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)43-48
Number of pages6
JournalAustralian Family Physician
Volume39
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Incentive Reimbursement
General Practice
Benchmarking
General Practitioners
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases
Exercise
United Kingdom

Cite this

@article{1997d8e3b0c14900ad1c27cbbfdfe094,
title = "How do we compare?: Applying UK pay for performance indicators to an Australian general practice",
abstract = "Background: United Kingdom general practitioners receive payment based on their performance in multiple clinical indicators. We set out to apply the same indicators in an Australian general practice to benchmark our performance and to see how much work was required to obtain the data. Methods: Clinical indicators for the 2008-2009 UK Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) cycle were examined and achievement levels measured in a large rural Australian general practice, mainly by computer searching of the clinical database. Results: Outcome measures were obtainable for 79 out of 80 indicators. Manual perusal of computer records was required for 16 indicators. Data collection takes approximately 130 hours. The Australian general practice achieved 66{\%} of available pay for performance points compared to the UK average of 97{\%}. Discussion: United Kingdom QOF clinical data is obtainable relatively easily in a well computerised Australian rural general practice. The exercise identified significant areas in which clinical performance could be improved.",
author = "Adrian Elliot-Smith and Morgan, {M. A J}",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "39",
pages = "43--48",
journal = "Australian Family Physician",
issn = "0300-8495",
publisher = "Royal Australian College of General Practitioners",
number = "1",

}

How do we compare? Applying UK pay for performance indicators to an Australian general practice. / Elliot-Smith, Adrian; Morgan, M. A J.

In: Australian Family Physician, Vol. 39, No. 1, 01.2010, p. 43-48.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - How do we compare?

T2 - Applying UK pay for performance indicators to an Australian general practice

AU - Elliot-Smith, Adrian

AU - Morgan, M. A J

PY - 2010/1

Y1 - 2010/1

N2 - Background: United Kingdom general practitioners receive payment based on their performance in multiple clinical indicators. We set out to apply the same indicators in an Australian general practice to benchmark our performance and to see how much work was required to obtain the data. Methods: Clinical indicators for the 2008-2009 UK Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) cycle were examined and achievement levels measured in a large rural Australian general practice, mainly by computer searching of the clinical database. Results: Outcome measures were obtainable for 79 out of 80 indicators. Manual perusal of computer records was required for 16 indicators. Data collection takes approximately 130 hours. The Australian general practice achieved 66% of available pay for performance points compared to the UK average of 97%. Discussion: United Kingdom QOF clinical data is obtainable relatively easily in a well computerised Australian rural general practice. The exercise identified significant areas in which clinical performance could be improved.

AB - Background: United Kingdom general practitioners receive payment based on their performance in multiple clinical indicators. We set out to apply the same indicators in an Australian general practice to benchmark our performance and to see how much work was required to obtain the data. Methods: Clinical indicators for the 2008-2009 UK Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) cycle were examined and achievement levels measured in a large rural Australian general practice, mainly by computer searching of the clinical database. Results: Outcome measures were obtainable for 79 out of 80 indicators. Manual perusal of computer records was required for 16 indicators. Data collection takes approximately 130 hours. The Australian general practice achieved 66% of available pay for performance points compared to the UK average of 97%. Discussion: United Kingdom QOF clinical data is obtainable relatively easily in a well computerised Australian rural general practice. The exercise identified significant areas in which clinical performance could be improved.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954639118&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 39

SP - 43

EP - 48

JO - Australian Family Physician

JF - Australian Family Physician

SN - 0300-8495

IS - 1

ER -