Showing papers by "Brenda Leese published in 1999"

Target payments in primary care: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The method by which physicians are paid may affect their professional practice. Although payment systems may be used to achieve policy objectives (e.g. improving quality of care, cost containment and recruitment to under-served areas), little is known about the effects of different payment systems in achieving these objectives. Target payments are a payment system which remunerate professionals only if they provide a minimum level of care. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of target payments on the professional practice of primary care physicians (PCPs) and health care outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register; the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register; MEDLINE (1966 to October 1997); BIDS EMBASE (1980 to October 1997); BIDS ISI (1981 to October 1997); EconLit (1969 to October 1997); HealthStar (1975 to October 1997) Helmis (1984 to October 1997); health economics discussion paper series of the Universities of York, Aberdeen, Sheffield, Bristol, Brunel, and McMaster; Swedish Institute of Health Economics; RAND corporation; and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series analyses of interventions comparing the impact of target payments to primary care professionals with alternative methods of payment, on patient outcomes, health services utilisation, health care costs, equity of care, and PCP satisfaction with working environment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies were included involving 149 practices. The use of target payments in the remuneration of PCPs was associated with improvements in immunisation rates, but the increase was statistically significant in only one of the two studies. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from the studies identified in this review is not of sufficient quality or power to obtain a clear answer to the question as to whether target payment remuneration provides a method of improving primary health care. Additional efforts should be directed in evaluating changes in physicians' remuneration systems. Although it would not be difficult to design a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the impact of such payment systems, it would be difficult politically to conduct such trials.

Recruitment and retention of general practitioners in the UK: what are the problems and solutions?

Abstract: Recruitment and retention of general practitioners (GPs) has become an issue of major concern in recent years. However, much of the evidence is anecdotal and some commentators continue to question the scale of workforce problems. Hence, there is a need to establish a clear picture of those instabilities (i.e. imbalances between demand and supply) that do exist in the GP labour market in the UK. Based on a review of the published literature, we identify problems that stem from: (i) the changing social composition of the workforce and the fact that a large proportion of qualified GPs are significantly underutilized within traditional career structures; and (ii) the considerable differences in the ability of local areas to match labour demand and supply. We argue that one way to address these problems would be to encourage greater flexibility in a number of areas highlighted in the literature: (i) time commitment across the working day and week; (ii) long-term career paths; (iii) training and education; and (iv) remuneration and contract conditions. Overall, although the evidence suggests that the predicted 'crisis' has not yet occurred in the GP labour market as a whole, there is no room for lack of imagination in planning terms. Workforce planners continue to emphasize national changes to the medical school intake as the means to balance labour demand and supply between the specialities; however, better retention and deployment of existing GP labour would arguably produce more effective supply-side solutions. In this context, current policy and practice developments (e.g. Primary Care Groups and Primary Care Act Pilot Sites) offer a unique learning base upon which to move forward.

Management and relationships in total purchasing pilots. Relevance for primary care groups.

Abstract: Primary Care Groups (PCGs) represent a natural evolution of the various models – total purchasing, multifunds and locality commissioning – embraced by the term “primary care commissioning”. They will involve large numbers of different professionals working together to commission improved health care for their populations. The total purchasing pilots (TPPs) were the subjects of an extensive evaluation which has highlighted the significance of developing and improving relationships between the key players as a prerequisite for the successful implementation of their strategy. Management arrangements were central to this success. Similar considerations will be of crucial importance for the PCGs which are considerably larger and more complex organisations than the TPPs.

The information requirements of total purchasing projects. Implications for primary care groups.

Abstract: To successfully purchase, commission and manage health services at the primary care level requires accurate, reliable, up‐to‐date and appropriate information for use by trusts, health authorities, and by the soon to be operational primary care groups. The national total purchasing evaluation has provided evidence which will be relevant to primary care groups, particularly in the areas of information technology (IT) and access to information. Progress in developing independent purchasing by total purchasers was slower than anticipated because of the large number of factors which had to be taken into account, of which IT and information were just two. Accurate and timely information will be crucial for primary care groups if they are to move from level 1 to level 4 without undue delay.