Ashworth Mark, Seed Paul, Armstrong David, Durbaba Stevo, Jones Roger
Honorary senior lecturer, King's College London School of Medicine at Guy's, King's College and St Thomas' Hospitals, London.
Br J Gen Pract. 2007 Jun;57(539):441-8.
The existence of health inequalities between least and most socially deprived areas is now well established.
To use Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) indicators to explore the characteristics of primary care in deprived communities.
Two-year study.
Primary care in England.
QOF data were obtained for each practice in England in 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 and linked with census derived social deprivation data (Index of Multiple Deprivation scores 2004), national urbanicity scores and a database of practice characteristics. Data were available for 8480 practices in 2004-2005 and 8264 practices in 2005-2006. Comparisons were made between practices in the least and most deprived quintiles.
The difference in mean total QOF score between practices in least and most deprived quintiles was 64.5 points in 2004-2005 (mean score, all practices, 959.9) and 30.4 in 2005-2006 (mean, 1012.6). In 2005-2006, the QOF indicators displaying the largest differences between least and most deprived quintiles were: recall of patients not attending appointments for injectable neuroleptics (79 versus 58%, respectively), practices opening > or =45 hours/week (90 versus 74%), practices conducting > or = 12 significant event audits in previous 3 years (93 versus 81%), proportion of epileptics who were seizure free > or = 12 months (77 versus 65%) and proportion of patients taking lithium with serum lithium within therapeutic range (90 versus 78%). Geographical differences were less in group and training practices.
Overall differences between primary care quality indicators in deprived and prosperous communities were small. However, shortfalls in specific indicators, both clinical and non-clinical, suggest that focused interventions could be applied to improve the quality of primary care in deprived areas.
社会最贫困地区与最富裕地区之间存在健康不平等现象,这一点现已得到充分证实。
运用质量与结果框架(QOF)指标来探究贫困社区初级医疗的特点。
为期两年的研究。
英格兰的初级医疗。
获取了2004 - 2005年和2005 - 2006年英格兰各医疗机构的QOF数据,并将其与人口普查得出的社会剥夺数据(2004年多重剥夺指数得分)、全国城市化得分以及医疗机构特征数据库相联系。2004 - 2005年有8480家医疗机构的数据可用,2005 - 2006年有8264家。对最贫困和最富裕五分位数组中的医疗机构进行了比较。
2004 - 2005年,最贫困和最富裕五分位数组中医疗机构的平均QOF总得分差值为64.5分(所有医疗机构的平均得分是959.9),2005 - 2006年为30.4分(平均分为1012.6)。2005 - 2006年,在最贫困和最富裕五分位数组之间差异最大的QOF指标有:未按预约前来注射神经阻滞剂患者的召回率(分别为79%和58%)、每周营业≥45小时的医疗机构(90%和74%)、前三年进行≥12次重大事件审计的医疗机构(93%和81%)、癫痫发作无≥12个月的癫痫患者比例(77%和65%)以及血清锂处于治疗范围内的服用锂盐患者比例(90%和78%)。团体和培训医疗机构的地理差异较小。
贫困社区和富裕社区初级医疗质量指标的总体差异较小。然而,特定指标(包括临床和非临床指标)的不足表明,可以采取针对性干预措施来提高贫困地区初级医疗的质量。