• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of qualsafetyQuality and Safety in Health CareCurrent TOCInstructions for authors
Qual Saf Health Care. Dec 2003; 12(6): 421–427.
PMCID: PMC1758041

Assessing the quality of care of multiple conditions in general practice: practical and methodological problems

Abstract

Objective: To investigate practical and methodological problems in assessing the quality of care of multiple conditions in general practice.

Setting: Sixteen general practices from two socioeconomically diverse regions in the UK.

Method: Quality of care was assessed in 100 randomly selected patient records in each practice using an established set of quality indicators covering 23 conditions commonly seen in primary care. Inter-rater reliability assessment was carried out for five of the conditions.

Results: Conducting simultaneous quality assessment across multiple conditions is highly resource intensive. Poor data quality and the low prevalence of some items of care defined by the indicators are significant problems. Scores for individual indicators require very large samples for reliable assessment. Quality scores are more reliable when reported at a higher unit of analysis. This is particularly true for indicators and conditions with low prevalence where data may need to be aggregated to the level of groups of conditions or organisational providers. There is no single ideal way of aggregating quality scores.

Conclusion: The study identified some of the practical and methodological difficulties in assessing quality of care across multiple conditions. For improved quality assessment, advances in information technology and improvements in data quality are required for more efficient and reliable data extraction from medical records, together with the development of methods for combining scores across indicators, conditions, and practices. However, electronic data extraction methods will still be based on the assumption that the care recorded reflects the care provided.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (212K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Brook RH, McGlynn EA, Cleary PD. Quality of health care. Part 2: measuring quality of care. N Engl J Med. 1996 Sep 26;335(13):966–970. [PubMed]
  • Campbell SM, Roland MO, Shekelle PG, Cantrill JA, Buetow SA, Cragg DK. Development of review criteria for assessing the quality of management of stable angina, adult asthma, and non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in general practice. Qual Health Care. 1999 Mar;8(1):6–15. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • McColl A, Roderick P, Gabbay J, Smith H, Moore M. Performance indicators for primary care groups: an evidence based approach. BMJ. 1998 Nov 14;317(7169):1354–1360. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Roland M, Marshall M. General practice in an age of measurement. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Aug;51(469):611–612. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Carroll K, Majeed A. Comorbidity associated with atrial fibrillation: a general practice-based study. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Nov;51(472):884–891. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Starfield B. New paradigms for quality in primary care. Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Apr;51(465):303–309. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Campbell SM, Braspenning J, Hutchinson A, Marshall M. Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Dec;11(4):358–364. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Marshall Martin, Roland Martin. The new contract: renaissance or requiem for general practice? Br J Gen Pract. 2002 Jul;52(480):531–532. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Brook RH, Chassin MR, Fink A, Solomon DH, Kosecoff J, Park RE. A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1986;2(1):53–63. [PubMed]
  • McGlynn EA, Kerr EA, Asch SM. New approach to assessing clinical quality of care for women: the QA Tool system. Womens Health Issues. 1999 Jul-Aug;9(4):184–192. [PubMed]
  • Schuster MA, McGlynn EA, Brook RH. How good is the quality of health care in the United States? Milbank Q. 1998;76(4):517–509. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Seddon ME, Marshall MN, Campbell SM, Roland MO. Systematic review of studies of quality of clinical care in general practice in the UK, Australia and New Zealand. Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10(3):152–158. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Campbell SM, Roland MO, Buetow SA. Defining quality of care. Soc Sci Med. 2000 Dec;51(11):1611–1625. [PubMed]

Articles from Quality & Safety in Health Care are provided here courtesy of BMJ Group

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

  • PubMed
    PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...