Search

Objective The objective was to examine the association between primary care consultations and a Care Need Index (CNI) used to compensate Swedish primary care practices for the extra workload associated with patients with low socioeconomic status. Design Observational study combining graphical analysis with linear regressions of cross-sectional administrative practice-level data. Setting Three Swedish regions, Västra Götaland, Skåne and Östergötland (3.5 million residents). Outcomes were measured in February 2018 and the CNI was computed based on data for 31 December 2017. Subjects The unit of analysis was the primary care practice (n = 390). Main outcome measures i) Number of GP visits per registered patient; ii) Number of nurse visits per registered patient; iii) Number of morbidity-weighted GP visits per registered patient; iv) Number of morbidity-weighted nurse visits per registered patient. Results The linear associations between the CNI and GP visits per patient were positive and statistically significant (p

Objective: A pay for performance programme was introduced in 2009 by a Swedish county with 1.6 million inhabitants. A process measure with payment linked to coding for medication reviews among the elderly was adopted. We assessed the association with inappropriate medication for five years after baseline. Design and setting: Observational study that compared medication for elderly patients enrolled at primary care units that coded for a high or low volume of medication reviews. Patients: 144,222 individuals at 196 primary care centres, age 75 or older. Main outcome measures: Percentage of patients receiving inappropriate drugs or polypharmacy during five years at primary care units with various levels of reported medication reviews. Results: The proportion of patients with a registered medication review had increased from 3.2% to 44.1% after five years. The high-coding units performed better for most indicators but had already done so at baseline. Primary care units with the lowest payment for coding for medication reviews improved just as well in terms of inappropriate drugs as units with the highest payment – from 13.0 to 8.5%, compared to 11.6 to 7.4% and from 13.6 to 7.2% vs 11.8 to 6.5% for polypharmacy. Conclusions: Payment linked to coding for medication reviews was associated with an increase in the percentage of patients for whom a medication review had been registered. However, the impact of payment on quality improvement is uncertain, given that units with the lowest payment for medication reviews improved equally well as units with the highest payment.