Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Oct 28:16:156.
doi: 10.1186/s12875-015-0350-6.

Developing 'high impact' guideline-based quality indicators for UK primary care: a multi-stage consensus process

Affiliations

Developing 'high impact' guideline-based quality indicators for UK primary care: a multi-stage consensus process

Bruno Rushforth et al. BMC Fam Pract. .

Abstract

Background: Quality indicators (QIs) are an important tool for improving clinical practice and are increasingly being developed from evidence-based guideline recommendations. We aimed to identify, select and apply guideline recommendations to develop a set of QIs to measure the implementation of evidence-based practice using routinely recorded clinical data in United Kingdom (UK) primary care.

Methods: We reviewed existing national clinical guidelines and QIs and used a four-stage consensus development process to derive a set of 'high impact' QIs relevant to primary care based upon explicit prioritisation criteria. We then field tested the QIs using remotely extracted, anonymised patient records from 89 randomly sampled primary care practices in the Yorkshire region of England.

Results: Out of 2365 recommendations and QIs originally reviewed, we derived a set of 18 QIs (5 single, 13 composites - comprising 2-9 individual recommendations) for field testing. QIs predominantly addressed chronic disease management, in particular diabetes, cardiovascular and renal disease, and included both processes and outcomes of care. Field testing proved to be critical for further refinement and final selection.

Conclusions: We have demonstrated a rigorous and transparent methodology to develop a set of high impact, evidence-based QIs for primary care from clinical guideline recommendations. While the development process was successful in developing a limited set of QIs, it remains challenging to derive robust new QIs from clinical guidelines in the absence of established systems for routine, structured recording of clinical care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart of five stage recommendation selection and quality indicator development process
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Worked examples of initial stages of quality indicator development process

References

    1. Eccles MP, Armstrong D, Baker R, Cleary K, Davies H, Davies S, Glasziou P, Ilott I, Kinmonth AL, Leng G, Logan S, Marteau T, Michie S, Rogers H, Rycroft-Malone J, Sibbald B. An implementation research agenda. Implement Sci. 2009;4:18. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-18. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Care R. NHS Atlas of Variation in Healthcare. 2011.
    1. Cooksey D. A review of UK health research funding. Norwich: HMSO; 2006. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dawda P, Jenkins R, Varnam R. Quality improvement in general practice. London: The King’s Fund; 2010.
    1. Duerden M, Millson D, Avery A, Smart S. The quality of GP prescribing. London: The King’s Fund; 2011.

Publication types

MeSH terms