ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1997
Assessing the performance of general practices caring for patients with asthma.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prescribed therapy for asthma: therapeutic ratios and outcomes.BMC family practice · 2015Article
- Validity of performance indicators for assessing prescribing quality: the case of asthma.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2004Article
- Changing clinical practice: views about the management of adult asthma.Quality in health care : QHC · 1999Article
- Predictive value of a simple asthma morbidity index in a general practice population.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1999Article
- Hospital admissions and quality of chronic illness care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1997Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGeneral practitioners (GPs) have had to record information about chronic disease management and send this to the health authorities since the introduction of the new contract in 1990.
aimTo discover the relationship between practice emergency admission rates for asthma and the characteristics of the practice's patients and chronic disease management programme.
methodThis was an ecological study comparing practice emergency admission rates of asthma by general practice with the practice's performance in measuring the prevalence, peak flow, and number of patients on regular prophylaxis. In addition, prescribing analysis and costing (PACT) data and census linkage were used to assign social class to patients and, when aggregated, to practices. The practice admission rate was correlated against each of these variables and then the relationships were explored in multiple linear regressions.
resultsA high rate of admission in practices was correlated with deprivation of the patients, in the form of a practice Townsend score (r = 0.33, P = 0.003), and also with poorer prescribing, measured by the preventer-reliever ratio (r = -0.38, P = 0.001). Regression analysis showed that the relationship between good prescribing and low admission rates was not explained by confounding variables. Only 32% of the variation in admission rates between practices was explained by the regression equation. None of the variables recorded in the annual report were significantly related to admission rates.
conclusionAnnual reports from the practice to the health authority are unhelpful in monitoring general practice performance, but prescribing, as measured by the preventer-reliever ratio, and hospital admission rates have limited usefulness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
9281868PMC1313051What 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.