ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2011
Correlation between prescribing quality and pharmaceutical costs in English primary care: national cross-sectional analysis.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anticholinergic Burden and Most Common Anticholinergic-acting Medicines in Older General Practice Patients.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2018Article
- Observational
- Compliance with quality prescribing indicators linked to financial incentives: what about not incentivized indicators?: an observational study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2014Observational
- Achievement of cholesterol targets and prescribing of higher-cost statins: a cross-sectional study in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBoth pharmaceutical costs and quality-indicator performance vary substantially between general practices, but little is known about the relationship between prescribing costs and quality.
aimTo measure the association between prescribing quality and pharmaceutical costs among English general practices. DESIGN AND
settingCross-sectional observational study using data from the Quality and Outcomes Framework and the Prescribing Analysis and Cost database from all 8409 general practices in England in 2005-2006.
methodCorrelation between practice achievement of 26 prescribing quality indicators in eight prescribing areas and related pharmaceutical costs was examined.
resultsThere was no significant association between the overall achievement of quality indicators and related pharmaceutical costs (P= 0.399). Mean achievement of quality indicators across all eight prescribing areas was 79.0% (standard deviation 4.4%). There were small positive correlations in five prescribing areas: influenza vaccination, beta blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, lipid lowering, and antiplatelet treatment (all P<0.001). There were small negative correlations in two prescribing areas: hypertension (P<0.001) and smoking cessation (P = 0.018).
conclusionCorrelations between prescribing quality and pharmaceutical costs were much smaller than expected; possible explanations for this include a substantial variation in rates of prescribing outside evidence-based protocols, and use of expensive pharmaceuticals instead of cheaper effective alternatives. There remains considerable scope for some practices to make pharmaceutical cost savings while improving quality performance. The ratio of quality scores to related pharmaceutical costs could be developed into a performance indicator.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.