How can patient experience scores be used to predict quality inspection ratings? A retrospective cross-sectional study of national primary care datasets in the UK.
health & safety
health policy
primary care
quality in health care
risk management
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 11 2020
26 11 2020
Historique:
entrez:
27
11
2020
pubmed:
28
11
2020
medline:
1
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The relationship between patient feedback in the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) and Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspections of practices was investigated to understand whether there is an association between patient views and regulator ratings of quality. The specific aims were to understand whether patients' self-reported experiences of primary care can predict CQC inspection ratings of GP practices by: (i) Measuring the association between GPPS results and CQC inspection ratings of GP practices; (ii) Building a predictive model of GP practice quality ratings that use GPPS results; and (iii) Evaluating the predictive model for risk stratification. Retrospective analysis of routinely collected data using decision tree modelling. Primary care: GP practices in England. GPPS scores and GP practice CQC inspection ratings during 2018. Most GP practices (72%, 974/1350) were rated as 'Good' overall by CQC. Simply assuming that all practices will be rated as 'Good' results in a correct prediction 72% of the time, and it was not possible to improve on this overall level of predictive accuracy using decision tree modelling (correct in 73% of cases). However, a set of GPPS questions were found to have value in identifying practices at elevated risk of a poor inspection rating. Although there were some associations between GPPS data and CQC inspection ratings, there were limitations to the use of GPPS data for predictive analysis. This is a likely result of the majority of CQC inspections of GPs resulting in a 'Good' or 'Outstanding' rating. However, some GPPS questions were found to have value in identifying practices at higher risk of an 'Inadequate' or 'Requires Improvement' rating, and this may be valuable for surveillance purposes. For example, the CQC could use key questions from the survey to target inspection planning.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33243813
pii: bmjopen-2020-041709
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041709
pmc: PMC7692819
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e041709Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2011;23(1):2-9
pubmed: 21338292
Med Care Res Rev. 2014 Oct;71(5):522-54
pubmed: 25027409
BMC Fam Pract. 2009 Aug 22;10:57
pubmed: 19698140
Br J Gen Pract. 2015 Oct;65(639):e640-1
pubmed: 26412839
BMJ. 2014 Mar 26;348:g2225
pubmed: 24671966
BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 17;9(7):e026472
pubmed: 31320347
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 2;7(3):e014718
pubmed: 28255096
BMC Fam Pract. 2013 Jun 25;14:89
pubmed: 23800138
Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Dec 26;70(690):e55-e63
pubmed: 31848199
BMJ. 2006 Jul 1;333(7557):19
pubmed: 16793783
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019 Jan 31;17(1):22
pubmed: 30704482
Am J Med Qual. 2015 Jul-Aug;30(4):382-8
pubmed: 24740016
Br J Gen Pract. 2015 Mar;65(632):112-3
pubmed: 25733412
Int J Qual Health Care. 2015 Apr;27(2):137-46
pubmed: 25758443
BMJ Open. 2015 Mar 24;5(3):e006172
pubmed: 25805528
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Feb;27(2):110-118
pubmed: 28971881