Skip to main content

Impact of Pay for Performance on Disparities in Stroke, Hypertension, and Coronary Heart Disease Management


The Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), a pay for performance programme, was introduced into United Kingdom (UK) primary care as part of a new General Practitioner (GP) contract in April 2004. Before the introduction of QOF, most British family doctors were earning a large proportion of their income from capitation payments. This system rewarded family doctors for having a large list of registered patients rather than for the quality of care that they provided.

There is limited definitive information about the impact of the QOF on level disparities in health care. In a study published in the journal PLoS One, John Lee and colleagues from Imperial College London investigated the following research questions: has QOF resulted in a step change in the quality of care for coronary heart disease, stroke and hypertension in white, black and south Asian patients? Has QOF reduced disparities in the quality of care for these conditions between these ethnic groups? Did general practices with different baseline performance respond differently to this programme?

The findings of this study suggest that the implementation of QOF resulted in significant short term improvements in blood pressure control. The magnitude of benefit varied between ethnic groups with a statistically significant short term reduction in systolic BP in white and black but not in south Asian patients with hypertension. Disparities in risk factor control were attenuated only on few measures and largely remained intact at the end of the study period.

The authors concluded that the QOF should set more challenging but achievable targets for general practitioners. Specific targets aimed at reducing ethnic disparities in health care may also be needed.

Figure: Trends in mean total cholesterol in patients with CHD and stroke.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Hidden Cost of Cheaper NHS Contracts: Losing Community Trust

NHS budgets are under considerable pressure. It is therefore unsurprising that many NHS Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) In England will aim to prioritise price in contract awards, But this approach is a significant threat to community-centred healthcare. While competitive tendering is a legally required, an excessive focus on costs in awarding NHS contracts risks overshadowing key factors such as established community trust, local expertise, and the long-term impact on continuity of care. This shift towards cheaper, often external, commercial providers threatens to cut the links between communities and their local health services. The argument that competitive tendering is solely about legal compliance, and not cost, is undermined by the very nature of such tendering, which by design encourages the lowest bid. This approach risks eroding the social fabric of local healthcare provision, where established relationships and understanding of specific community needs are essential. Establishe...

MPH Student Presentations on the NHS Care.Data Programme

As part of a session on primary care data in the Health Informatics module on the Imperial Master of Public Health Programme, I asked students to work in two groups to present arguments for and against the NHS Care.Data programme. Care.Data is an NHS programme that will extract data from the medical records held by general practitioners (GPs) in England. The Care.Data programme takes advantage of the very high level of use of electronic medical records by GPs in England. After extraction, data will be uploaded to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The data will then be used for functions such as health care planning, monitoring disease patterns and research. The programme has been controversial with proponents arguing that the programme will bring many benefits for the NHS and the population of England; and opponents arguing it is a major breach of privacy. You can view the two presentations to help inform you further about these arguments: Arguments fo...

Talking to Patients About Weight-Loss Drugs

The use of weight-loss drugs such as GLP-1 receptor agonists (e.g., semaglutide, tirzepatide) has increased rapidly in recent years. These drugs can help some people achieve significant weight reduction, but they are not suitable for everyone and require careful counselling before starting treatment. By discussing benefits, risks, practicalities, and  uncertainties, clinicians can help patients make informed, realistic decisions about their treatment. Key points to discuss with patients 1. Indications and eligibility These drugs are usually licensed for adults with a specific BMI. They should be used alongside lifestyle interventions such as dietary change, increased physical activity, and behaviour modification. 2. Potential side effects – some can be serious Common adverse effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and abdominal discomfort. Less common but more serious risks include gallstones, pancreatitis and visual problems. Patients should know what to watch for a...