Data quality in primary care, Scotland

TY - JOUR

T1 - Data quality in primary care, Scotland

AU - Weatherburn, Christopher J.

N1 - Funding Information: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This project received no external funding, although the project did contribute toward an MSc in Digital Healthcare Leadership run by Imperial College London. Fees were funded by Scottish Government and NHS Tayside. Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2021. Copyright: Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2021/5

Y1 - 2021/5

N2 - Background and aims: This project explores primary care data quality (DQ) across Scotland.Methods and results: A survey was sent to primary care staff in winter 2019. National data regarding Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) performance indicators and the GP software system used was obtained, analysed with T-tests and Chi-squared tests. Overall QOF performance with non-financial incentives from 918 practices was 77%. There was no significant difference with overall QOF performance against GP system (p = 0.46) or if the practice had a coder (p = 0.06). From the survey, search systems that make it hard to search for particular codes was the most important barrier to DQ; 61% of respondents (n = 491) felt there was particular information GPs should code, 16% of respondents stated that hospital discharge letters generally include corresponding codes and 9% for outpatient correspondence; 43% stated their practice had undertaken steps to improve DQ, training was the most common initiative, followed by workflow optimisation, dedicated coder(s), audit, guidelines and using code lists; 80% (n = 475) of respondents had received training in using their GP system, an average of eight years ago.Conclusion: Obtaining improved GP systems, training, agreeing what GPs should code and improving transfer of data should be explored.

AB - Background and aims: This project explores primary care data quality (DQ) across Scotland.Methods and results: A survey was sent to primary care staff in winter 2019. National data regarding Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) performance indicators and the GP software system used was obtained, analysed with T-tests and Chi-squared tests. Overall QOF performance with non-financial incentives from 918 practices was 77%. There was no significant difference with overall QOF performance against GP system (p = 0.46) or if the practice had a coder (p = 0.06). From the survey, search systems that make it hard to search for particular codes was the most important barrier to DQ; 61% of respondents (n = 491) felt there was particular information GPs should code, 16% of respondents stated that hospital discharge letters generally include corresponding codes and 9% for outpatient correspondence; 43% stated their practice had undertaken steps to improve DQ, training was the most common initiative, followed by workflow optimisation, dedicated coder(s), audit, guidelines and using code lists; 80% (n = 475) of respondents had received training in using their GP system, an average of eight years ago.Conclusion: Obtaining improved GP systems, training, agreeing what GPs should code and improving transfer of data should be explored.

KW - Data accuracy

KW - Health Services Administration

KW - electronic health records

KW - primary health care

KW - surveys and questionnaires

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85101267913

U2 - 10.1177/0036933021995965

DO - 10.1177/0036933021995965

M3 - Article

C2 - 33615904

SN - 0036-9330

VL - 66

SP - 66

EP - 72

JO - Scottish Medical Journal

JF - Scottish Medical Journal

IS - 2

ER -