Article Figures & Data
Tables
- Table 1
Summary Statistics for GPPS Item Scores and QOF Clinical Summary Score (N = 7,759 Practices)
Item Median Interquartile Range GPPS Q4 Helpful receptionists 83.3 79.5 – 86.9 Q5a Get through on the phone 69.1 59.4 – 78.0 Q5b Speak to a doctor on the phone 53.8 44.1 – 62.1 Q7 See a doctor in the next 2 days 84.1 76.8 – 89.9 Q10 Get an appointment in advance 76.8 65.7 – 86.1 Q16 See preferred doctor 76.0 69.0 – 82.4 Q17 Satisfied opening hours 80.6 77.5 – 83.4 Q20 Doctor patient communication 84.2 81.1 – 86.6 Q21 Confidence and trust in doctor 84.7 81.0 – 87.5 Q24 Nurse patient communication 85.5 83.3 – 87.4 Q25 Overall satisfaction 86.2 82.9 – 88.9 Care planning Q28a Doctor/nurse took notice of patient views 94.6 93.5 – 95.5 Q28b Given information 90.9 89.5 – 92.2 Q28c Doctor/nurse patient agreement 89.6 87.7 – 91.0 Q28d Given written document 22.9 20.5 – 25.4 Q28e Given a “care plan” 13.2 12.0 – 14.5 Q29 Discussion improved management of health 66.4 63.9 – 68.6 QOF clinical summary score 80.6 78.5 – 82.4 -
GPPS = General Practice Patient Survey; Q =question; QOF = Quality Outcome Framework.
-
GPPS items reflect scores on a scale of 0 to 100, and QOF clinical summary scores are a weighted average of percentage achievement.
-
- Table 2
Coefficients Between GPPS Item Scores and QOF Clinical Summary Score (N = 7,759 Practices)
Linear Regression Analysis GPPS Item Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficientsa Crudeb Adjusted for Practice Population Characteristicsc Q4 Helpful receptionists 0.15 0.15 0.15 Q5a Get through on the phone 0.16 0.15 0.16 Q5b Speak to a doctor on the phone 0.11 0.12 0.11 Q7 See a doctor in the next 2 days 0.15 0.15 0.14 Q10 Get an appointment in advance 0.18 0.16 0.16 Q16 See preferred doctor 0.17 0.16 0.16 Q17 Satisfied opening hours 0.13 0.13 0.13 Q20 Doctor patient communication 0.09 0.10 0.08 Q21 Confidence and trust in doctor 0.10 0.12 0.10 Q24 Nurse patient communication 0.11 0.11 0.10 Q25 Overall satisfaction 0.15 0.17 0.16 Care planning Q28a Doctor/nurse took notice of patient views 0.04 0.05 0.03 Q28b Given information 0.08 0.09 0.08 Q28c Doctor/nurse patient agreement 0.08 0.09 0.08 Q28d Given written document 0.08 0.09 0.09 Q28e Given a “care plan” 0.11 0.10 0.10 Q29 Discussion improved management of health 0.11 0.12 0.11 - Table 3
Regression Analysis Showing Proportion of QOF Variance Associated With Different Groups of GPPS Items
Explanatory Variables Proportion of QOF Variance Associated With GPPS Dimension (R2) Access (Q4, Q5a, Q5b, Q7, Q10, and Q17) 0.0366 Continuity (Q16) 0.0243 Communication (Q20 and Q24) 0.0139 Overall satisfaction (Q25) 0.0254 Confidence and trust in doctor (Q21) 0.0105 Care planning (Q28a, Q28b, Q28c, Q28d, Q28e, Q29) 0.0192 -
GPPS = General Practice Patient Survey; Q = question; QOF = Quality Outcome Framework.
-
Note: see Table 1 for description of questions.
-
Additional Files
The Article in Brief
Relationship Between Clinical Quality and Patient Experience: Analysis of Data From the English Quality and Outcomes Framework and the National GP Patient Survey
Nadia R. Llanwarne , and colleagues
Background Providing high-quality clinical care and a good patient experience are priorities for most health care systems, but there has been little research into the relationship between these 2 domains of quality. This study examines this relationship using data from 2 established measures of quality in primary care in England.
What This Study Found There is little correlation between quality of care assessed by clinical measures and that assessed by patient experience measures, suggesting that both are needed to get a balanced picture of quality. Analyzing patient experience and clinical performance data from 7,759 practices, researchers found although the correlations between clinical quality summary scores and patient survey scores were all positive, the strength of the associations was weak, with the highest correlation coefficient reaching 0.18, and more than one-half 0.11 or less. The strongest correlations with clinical quality were highest for patient assessments of access (ability to get through on the telephone, availability of urgent appointment, ability to book ahead, ability to see preferred doctor) and overall satisfaction. There were very low correlations between clinical quality and interpersonal aspects of care.
Implications
- The authors conclude that clinical and patient experience domains of quality need to be considered separately when assessing the overall performance of a family practice.
Supplemental Appendix & Table
Supplemental Appendix. Statistical Methods; Supplemental Table 1. Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficients Between GPPS Item Scores and QOF Scores, Arranged by Clinical Domain and Type of Indicator Correlation
Files in this Data Supplement:
- Supplemental data: Appendix - PDF file, 3 pages
- Supplemental data: Table - PDF file, 1 page
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- Impact of primary care funding on patient satisfaction: a retrospective longitudinal study of English general practice, 2013-2016
- Physicians' Response to Patients' Quality-of-Life Goals
- Relationship between general practice capitation funding and the quality of primary care in England: a cross-sectional, 3-year study
- Core Principles to Improve Primary Care Quality Management
- Patient experience of general practice and use of emergency hospital services in England: regression analysis of national cross-sectional time series data
- Patient experience of NHS health checks: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis
- Extended opening hours and patient experience of general practice in England: multilevel regression analysis of a national patient survey
- Language spoken at home and the association between ethnicity and doctor-patient communication in primary care: analysis of survey data for South Asian and White British patients
- Quality Measures for Dialysis: Time for a Balanced Scorecard
- Why do patients with multimorbidity in England report worse experiences in primary care? Evidence from the General Practice Patient Survey
- How Do People With Diabetes Describe Their Experiences in Primary Care? Evidence From 85,760 Patients With Self-reported Diabetes From the English General Practice Patient Survey
- Can the outcome of primary care be measured by a Patient Reported Outcome Measure?
- Relationship between patient reported experience (PREMs) and patient reported outcomes (PROMs) in elective surgery
- Ecological studies: use with caution
- In This Issue: Mindfulness in Practice and Policy