• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

制定质量与结果框架(QOF)指标以及“QOF 适用性”概念。

Developing Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) indicators and the concept of 'QOFability'.

作者信息

Lester Helen, Campbell Stephen

机构信息

Primary Care, National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, Manchester, UK.

出版信息

Qual Prim Care. 2010;18(2):103-9.

PMID:20529471
Abstract

This paper explains the reasons and context behind the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) in the UK in April 2004. The QOF is a pay-for-performance scheme covering a range of clinical and organisational areas in primary care. In 2004, 52% of the framework related to clinical care, increasing to 66% in 2006 and 70% in 2009. From April 2009, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has led a new process for developing the clinical QOF indicators. Clinical areas are now prioritised by an advisory committee appointed by NICE; the QOF indicators then undergo a formal consensus procedure followed by piloting in representative practices across England. However, what are the attributes of a good QOF indicator and how do these differ from those of a good quality indicator, such as validity and sensitivity to change? This paper describes the concept of 'QOFability', which relates to why some areas are, and others are not, prioritised for the QOF. Factors include the prevalence of the clinical issue, the accuracy of data extraction from GP clinical systems, the clarity of diagnosis, the relevance of incentivised actions, the direct attribution to all primary care staff and consideration of any possible unintended consequences of introducing any given indicator. The paper concludes by considering the future direction of the QOF, recommending a focus on creating feasible, valid, reliable and piloted 'QOFable' clinical indicators.

摘要

本文解释了2004年4月英国引入质量与结果框架(QOF)背后的原因和背景。QOF是一项绩效付费计划,涵盖初级医疗保健中的一系列临床和组织领域。2004年,该框架的52%与临床护理相关,到2006年这一比例增至66%,2009年为70%。自2009年4月起,英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)牵头开展了一项制定临床QOF指标的新流程。现在,临床领域由NICE任命的一个咨询委员会确定优先顺序;QOF指标随后要经过正式的共识程序,接着在英格兰各地具有代表性的医疗机构中进行试点。然而,一个好的QOF指标具有哪些属性,这些属性与一个好的质量指标(如有效性和对变化的敏感性)的属性有何不同?本文描述了“QOF适用性”这一概念,它涉及为何有些领域被纳入QOF优先范畴而有些则未被纳入。这些因素包括临床问题的普遍性、从全科医生临床系统中提取数据的准确性、诊断的清晰度、激励行动的相关性、对所有初级医疗保健人员的直接归因以及对引入任何特定指标可能产生的意外后果的考虑。本文最后探讨了QOF的未来发展方向,建议重点关注创建可行、有效、可靠且经过试点的“具有QOF适用性的”临床指标。

相似文献

1
Developing Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) indicators and the concept of 'QOFability'.制定质量与结果框架(QOF)指标以及“QOF 适用性”概念。
Qual Prim Care. 2010;18(2):103-9.
2
Quality and Outcomes Framework: smoke and mirrors?质量与结果框架:障眼法?
Qual Prim Care. 2010;18(2):127-31.
3
NICE and the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) 2009-2011.英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)与2009 - 2011年质量与结果框架(QOF)
Qual Prim Care. 2012;20(1):47-55.
4
Primary care quality indicators for children: measuring quality in UK general practice.儿童初级保健质量指标:衡量英国全科医疗的质量
Br J Gen Pract. 2014 Dec;64(629):e752-7. doi: 10.3399/bjgp14X682813.
5
The impact of the Quality and Outcomes Framework on practice organisation and service delivery: summary of evidence from two qualitative studies.质量与结果框架对实践组织和服务提供的影响:两项定性研究的证据总结
Qual Prim Care. 2010;18(2):139-46.
6
Views of German general practitioners on the clinical indicators of the British Quality and Outcomes Framework: a qualitative study.德国全科医生对英国质量与结果框架临床指标的看法:一项定性研究。
Qual Prim Care. 2010;18(2):85-92.
7
Identifying unintended consequences of quality indicators: a qualitative study.识别质量指标的意外后果:一项定性研究。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2011 Dec;20(12):1057-61. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs.2010.048371. Epub 2011 Jun 21.
8
The relationship between general practice characteristics and quality of care: a national survey of quality indicators used in the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework, 2004-5.全科医疗特征与医疗质量之间的关系:对2004 - 2005年英国质量与结果框架中使用的质量指标的全国性调查。
BMC Fam Pract. 2006 Nov 13;7:68. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-7-68.
9
Has pay for performance improved the management of diabetes in the United Kingdom?按服务项目付费是否改善了英国的糖尿病管理?
Prim Care Diabetes. 2010 Jul;4(2):73-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2010.02.003. Epub 2010 Apr 2.
10
The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in the development of indicators to support incentive-based behaviour in primary care in England.成本效益分析在制定指标以支持英格兰初级保健中基于激励的行为方面的作用。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2016 Oct;21(4):263-71. doi: 10.1177/1355819616650912. Epub 2016 May 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Effect of UK Quality and Outcomes Framework pay-for-performance programme on quality of primary care: systematic review with quantitative synthesis.英国质量与结果框架绩效薪酬计划对初级医疗保健质量的影响:定量综合系统评价
BMJ. 2025 Jun 25;389:e083424. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-083424.
2
Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care for hypertension in the UK: a population-based cohort study.2019年冠状病毒病疫情对英国高血压初级保健的影响:一项基于人群的队列研究。
BMJ Open. 2024 Dec 20;14(12):e089834. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089834.
3
Quality indicators for improved cardiovascular care: learnings from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
改善心血管护理的质量指标:来自英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所的经验教训。
Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2025 Jun 23;11(4):489-492. doi: 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcae097.
4
Reforms and innovations in primary health care in different countries: scoping review.不同国家初级卫生保健的改革与创新:范围综述
Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2024 Apr 23;25:e22. doi: 10.1017/S1463423623000725.
5
Obesity, metabolic health and clinical outcomes after incident cardiovascular disease: A nationwide population-based cohort study.肥胖、代谢健康与心血管疾病发病后的临床结局:一项全国范围内基于人群的队列研究。
J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2023 Dec;14(6):2653-2662. doi: 10.1002/jcsm.13340. Epub 2023 Oct 8.
6
Comparing the number and length of primary care consultations in people with and without intellectual disabilities and health needs: observational cohort study using electronic health records.比较有和没有智力残疾和健康需求的人群中初级保健咨询的数量和长度:使用电子健康记录的观察性队列研究。
Fam Pract. 2024 Aug 14;41(4):501-509. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmac135.
7
Development of indicators to assess quality and patient pathways in interdisciplinary care for patients with 14 ambulatory-care-sensitive conditions in Germany.开发用于评估德国 14 种门诊医疗敏感条件患者的跨学科护理质量和患者路径的指标。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Aug 9;22(1):1015. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08327-1.
8
Clinical code usage in UK general practice: a cohort study exploring 18 conditions over 14 years.英国全科医疗中的临床编码使用情况:一项探索 18 种疾病 14 年的队列研究。
BMJ Open. 2022 Jul 25;12(7):e051456. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051456.
9
Australian general practitioner perceptions to sharing clinical data for secondary use: a mixed method approach.澳大利亚全科医生对二次使用临床数据共享的看法:混合方法研究。
BMC Prim Care. 2022 Jul 1;23(1):167. doi: 10.1186/s12875-022-01759-y.
10
Immortal time bias for life-long conditions in retrospective observational studies using electronic health records.基于电子健康记录的回顾性观察研究中,终身状况的无事件生存时间偏倚。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022 Mar 27;22(1):86. doi: 10.1186/s12874-022-01581-1.