Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

General practitioners’ perceptions of public reporting of institution and individual medicine prescribing data

Authors: Xin Du, Xinping Zhang, Yuqing Tang

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Public reporting of institution- and individual-level performance data has recently become a popular topic in the health care field. This study (1) evaluated the perceptions of general practitioners on the public reporting of institutional and individual medicine prescribing data in primary care institutions, and (2) compared the difference among the perceptions of general practitioners on the dimensions of necessity, methodological rigor, and impact of public reporting medicine prescribing data.

Methods

We conducted a survey in 10 primary care institutions in Q city, Hubei province. General practitioners who hold prescribing license were eligible for this study; we surveyed all eligible general practitioners in July 2014. The survey instrument was developed based on previous studies and expert opinions. Paired t-test or nonparametric test was used to evaluate the difference in perceptions between the institutional and individual medicine prescribing data reporting. An analysis of variance test was used to analyze the score differences among the three dimensions (i.e., necessity, methodological rigor, and impact).

Results

A total of 154 general practitioners were surveyed in this study. No significant difference in the perceptions of general practitioners was observed between the institution- and individual-level medicine prescribing data reporting (p > 0.05). General practitioners have significantly different perceptions on the three dimensions of the institution- and individual-level data reporting (p < 0.05). Methodological rigor obtained the lowest score. Regarding the strategies to facilitate the medicine prescribing data reporting, over 80 % of general practitioners selected the items that disclose process measures and not outcome measures, as well as educate patients on data interpretation.

Conclusion

The perceptions of general practitioners between institution- and individual-level data reporting have no significant difference. General practitioners place their utmost concern on public reporting on the methodological rigor. Processing measures and patient education to improve the efficiency of public reporting require substantial attention.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Burns EM, Pettengell C, Athanasiou T, Darzi A. Understanding The Strengths And Weaknesses Of Public Reporting Of Surgeon-Specific Outcome Data. Health Aff. 2016;35(3):415–21.CrossRef
2.
Dehmer GJ, Jennings J, Madden RA, Malenka DJ, Masoudi FA, McKay CR, et al. The National Cardiovascular Data Registry Voluntary Public Reporting Program: An Interim Report From the NCDR Public Reporting Advisory Group. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(2):205–15.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Neil DA, Clarke S, Oakley JG. Public reporting of individual surgeon performance information: United Kingdom developments and Australian issues. Med J Aust. 2004;181(5):266–8.PubMed
4.
5.
Hafner JM, Williams SC, Koss RG, Tschurtz BA, Schmaltz SP, Loeb JM. The perceived impact of public reporting hospital performance data: interviews with hospital staff. Int J Qual Health Care. 2011;23(6):697–704.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Sherman KL, Gordon EJ, Mahvi DM, Chung J, Bentrem DJ, Holl JL, et al. Surgeons’ perceptions of public reporting of hospital and individual surgeon quality. Med Care. 2013;51(12):1069–75.CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
James J. Health policy brief: public reporting on quality and costs. Health Aff. 2012;1–5.
9.
Shekelle P: Public performance reporting on quality information. In: Smith P, Mossialos E, Papanicolas I, Leatherman S, editors. Performance measurement for health system improvement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009. p. 537–551.
10.
Ross JS, Williams L, Damush TM, Matthias M. Physician and other healthcare personnel responses to hospital stroke quality of care performance feedback: a qualitative study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2016;25(6):441–7.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Brekke KR, Nuscheler R, Straume OR. Gatekeeping in health care. J Health Econ. 2007;26(1):149–70.
12.
Binu VS, Mayya SS, Dhar M. Some basic aspects of statistical methods and sample size determination in health science research. Int Q J Res Ayurveda. 2014;35(2):119–23.CrossRef
13.
Narins CR, Dozier AM, Ling FS, et al. The influence of public reporting of outcome data on medical decision making by physicians. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(1):83–7.CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M. Hospital Performance Reports: Impact On Quality, Market Share, And Reputation. Health Aff. 2005;24(4):1150–60.CrossRef
16.
Marshall MN, Shekelle PG, Davies HTO, Smith PC. Public Reporting On Quality In The United States And The United Kingdom. Health Aff. 2003;22(3):134–48.CrossRef
17.
Rademakers J, Nijman J, Brabers AEM, de Jong JD, Hendriks M. The relative effect of health literacy and patient activation on provider choice in the Netherlands. Health Policy. 2014;114(2–3):200–6.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Wang X, Tang Y, Zhang X, Yin X, Du X, Zhang X. Effect of Publicly Reporting Performance Data of Medicine Use on Injection Use: A Quasi-Experimental Study. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e109594.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Barr JK, Bernard SL, Sofaer S, Giannotti TE, Lenfestey NF, Miranda DJ. Physicians’ Views on Public Reporting of Hospital Quality Data. Med Care Res Rev. 2008;65(6):655–73.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Rechel B, McKee M, Haas M, Marchildon GP, Bousquet F, Blümel M, et al. Public reporting on quality, waiting times and patient experience in 11 high-income countries. Health Policy. 2016;120(4):377–83.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Marjoua Y, Butler CA, Bozic KJ. Public Reporting of Cost and Quality Information in Orthopaedics. Clin Orthop Relat Res®. 2012;470(4):1017–26.CrossRef
22.
Dehmer GJ, Drozda JP, Brindis RG, Masoudi FA, Rumsfeld JS, Slattery LE, et al. Public Reporting of Clinical Quality Data. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(13):1239–45.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Lamb GC, Smith MA, Weeks WB, Queram C. Publicly Reported Quality-Of-Care Measures Influenced Wisconsin Physician Groups To Improve Performance. Health Aff. 2013;32(3):536–43.CrossRef
24.
Smith MA, Wright A, Queram C, Lamb GC. Public Reporting Helped Drive Quality Improvement In Outpatient Diabetes Care Among Wisconsin Physician Groups. Health Aff. 2012;31(3):570–7.CrossRef
25.
26.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Process-Based Quality Improvement (PBQI) Manual. 2010.
27.
Yang L, Liu C, Wang L, Yin X, Zhang X. Public reporting improves antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections in primary care: a matched-pair cluster-randomized trial in China. Health Res Policy Syst. 2014;12:61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Kumpunen S, Trigg L, Rodrigues R. Public reporting in health and long-term care to facilitate provider choice. WHO Regional Office for Europe and European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. 2014;1–48.
Metadata
Title
General practitioners’ perceptions of public reporting of institution and individual medicine prescribing data
Authors
Xin Du
Xinping Zhang
Yuqing Tang
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1893-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Health Services Research 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research article

A survey of health care needs of physicians

Study protocol

Models of reablement evaluation (MoRE): a study protocol of a quasi-experimental mixed methods evaluation of reablement services in England

Research article

Utilization of youth friendly services and associated factors among youth in Harar town, east Ethiopia: a mixed method study

Research article

The impact of user fees on health services utilization and infectious disease diagnoses in Neno District, Malawi: a longitudinal, quasi-experimental study

Research article

The dominance of the private sector in the provision of emergency obstetric care: studies from Gujarat, India

Study protocol

Brief case management versus usual care for frequent users of emergency departments: the Coordinated Access to Care from Hospital Emergency Departments (CATCH-ED) randomized controlled trial