首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >The UK Quality and Outcomes Framework pay-for-performance scheme and spirometry: rewarding quality or just quantity? A cross-sectional study in Rotherham, UK
【24h】

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

机译:英国质量与成果框架绩效付费计划和肺活量测定法:奖励质量还是数量?英国罗瑟勒姆的横断面研究

获取原文
           

摘要

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.
机译:背景准确的肺活量测定对COPD的管理很重要。英国质量和成果框架针对全科医生的绩效绩效计划在其COPD领域内包括与肺活量测定相关的指标。尚不清楚针对QOF肺活量测定指标的高成就是否与BTS标准的肺活量测定相关联。方法从英国罗瑟勒姆市38种常规实践中从5649名COPD患者中随机抽取的3217名患者的记录中获得数据。气流阻塞的严重程度根据NICE指南按FEV1(预测的百分比)分类。将其与临床医生记录的COPD严重程度进行比较。在每种实践中,使用761名患者的随机子样本计算出符合BTS标准的肺活量测定的患者比例。计算了实践水平QOF肺活量测定成绩与针对BTS肺活量测定标准的表现之间的Spearman等级相关性。结果31%的病例通过临床记录评估的肺活量达到BTS标准(在实践水平的0%至74%范围内)。根据最新的肺活量测定结果对气流阻塞的分类与注释中记录的COPD的临床分类不太吻合(Cohen的kappa = 0.34、0.30 – 0.38)。 COPD登记簿上有12%的患者记录了FEV1(预测的百分比)结果,不支持COPD的诊断。通过遵守BTS肺活量测定标准衡量的质量与QOF COPD9成绩(Spearman的rho = -0.11)或QOF COPD10成绩(rho = 0.01)之间没有关联。结论目前,英国质量和结果框架评估的是肺活量测定的数量,而不是肺活量测定的质量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号