» Articles » PMID: 17550668

The Relationship Between Social Deprivation and the Quality of Primary Care: a National Survey Using Indicators from the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework

Overview
Journal Br J Gen Pract
Specialty Public Health
Date 2007 Jun 7
PMID 17550668
Citations 39
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The existence of health inequalities between least and most socially deprived areas is now well established.

Aim: To use Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) indicators to explore the characteristics of primary care in deprived communities.

Design Of Study: Two-year study.

Setting: Primary care in England.

Method: QOF data were obtained for each practice in England in 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 and linked with census derived social deprivation data (Index of Multiple Deprivation scores 2004), national urbanicity scores and a database of practice characteristics. Data were available for 8480 practices in 2004-2005 and 8264 practices in 2005-2006. Comparisons were made between practices in the least and most deprived quintiles.

Results: The difference in mean total QOF score between practices in least and most deprived quintiles was 64.5 points in 2004-2005 (mean score, all practices, 959.9) and 30.4 in 2005-2006 (mean, 1012.6). In 2005-2006, the QOF indicators displaying the largest differences between least and most deprived quintiles were: recall of patients not attending appointments for injectable neuroleptics (79 versus 58%, respectively), practices opening > or =45 hours/week (90 versus 74%), practices conducting > or = 12 significant event audits in previous 3 years (93 versus 81%), proportion of epileptics who were seizure free > or = 12 months (77 versus 65%) and proportion of patients taking lithium with serum lithium within therapeutic range (90 versus 78%). Geographical differences were less in group and training practices.

Conclusions: Overall differences between primary care quality indicators in deprived and prosperous communities were small. However, shortfalls in specific indicators, both clinical and non-clinical, suggest that focused interventions could be applied to improve the quality of primary care in deprived areas.

Citing Articles

How Neighborhood Social Deprivation Is Associated With Nursing Home Quality: A Structure, Process, Outcome Model.

Pradhan R, Lord J, Orewa G, Davlyatov G, Weech-Maldonado R Innov Aging. 2025; 9(2):igaf004.

PMID: 39963524 PMC: 11831227. DOI: 10.1093/geroni/igaf004.


The relationship between Quality and Outcomes Framework scores and socioeconomic deprivation: a longitudinal study.

Mann O, Bracegirdle T, Shantikumar S BJGP Open. 2023; 7(4).

PMID: 37562823 PMC: 11176694. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0024.


Healthcare Equity and Commissioning: A Four-Year National Analysis of Portuguese Primary Healthcare Units.

Pereira A, Biscaia A, Calado I, Freitas A, Costa A, Coelho A Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(22).

PMID: 36429538 PMC: 9690059. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192214819.


The public health impact of loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Allen J, Darlington O, Hughes K, Bellis M BMC Public Health. 2022; 22(1):1654.

PMID: 36045422 PMC: 9433133. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-14055-2.


Infection-related complications after common infection in association with new antibiotic prescribing in primary care: retrospective cohort study using linked electronic health records.

van Bodegraven B, Palin V, Mistry C, Sperrin M, White A, Welfare W BMJ Open. 2021; 11(1):e041218.

PMID: 33452190 PMC: 7813359. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041218.


References
1.
Hippisley-Cox J, OHanlon S, Coupland C . Association of deprivation, ethnicity, and sex with quality indicators for diabetes: population based survey of 53,000 patients in primary care. BMJ. 2004; 329(7477):1267-9. PMC: 534442. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38279.588125.7C. View

2.
Adams J, White M . Socio-economic deprivation is associated with increased proximity to general practices in England: an ecological analysis. J Public Health (Oxf). 2005; 27(1):80-1. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdh210. View

3.
Campbell S, Roland M, Middleton E, Reeves D . Improvements in quality of clinical care in English general practice 1998-2003: longitudinal observational study. BMJ. 2005; 331(7525):1121. PMC: 1283276. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38632.611123.AE. View

4.
Saxena S, George J, Barber J, Fitzpatrick J, Majeed A . Association of population and practice factors with potentially avoidable admission rates for chronic diseases in London: cross sectional analysis. J R Soc Med. 2006; 99(2):81-9. PMC: 1360495. DOI: 10.1177/014107680609900221. View

5.
Wright J, Martin D, Cockings S, Polack C . Overall quality of outcomes framework scores lower in practices in deprived areas. Br J Gen Pract. 2006; 56(525):277-9. PMC: 1832235. View