Journal article
How did a quality premium financial incentive influence antibiotic prescribing in primary care? Views of clinical commissioning group and general practice professionals
- Abstract:
-
Background:
The Quality Premium (QP) was introduced for Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in England to optimize antibiotic prescribing, but it remains unclear how it was implemented.
Objectives:
To understand responses to the QP and how it was perceived to influence antibiotic prescribing.
Methods:
Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 22 CCG and 19 general practice professionals. Interviews were analysed thematically.
Results:
The findings were organized into four categories. (i) Communication: this was perceived as unstructured and infrequent, and CCG professionals were unsure whether they received QP funding. (ii) Implementation: this was influenced by available local resources and competing priorities, with multifaceted and tailored strategies seen as most helpful for engaging general practices. Many antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) strategies were implemented independently from the QP, motivated by quality improvement. (iii) Mechanisms: the QP raised the priority of AMS nationally and locally, and provided prescribing targets to aim for and benchmark against, but money was not seen as reinvested into AMS. (iv) Impact and sustainability: the QP was perceived as successful, but targets were considered challenging for a minority of CCGs and practices due to contextual factors (e.g. deprivation, understaffing). CCG professionals were concerned with potential discontinuation of the QP and prescribing rates levelling off.
Conclusions:
CCG and practice professionals expressed positive views of the QP and associated prescribing targets and feedback. The QP helped influence change mainly by raising the priority of AMS and defining change targets rather than providing additional funding. To maximize impact, behavioural mechanisms of financial incentives should be considered pre-implementation.
- Publication status:
- Published
- Peer review status:
- Peer reviewed
Actions
Access Document
- Files:
-
-
(Preview, Accepted manuscript, pdf, 1.5MB, Terms of use)
-
- Publisher copy:
- 10.1093/jac/dkaa224
Authors
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- Journal:
- Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy More from this journal
- Volume:
- 75
- Issue:
- 9
- Pages:
- 2681–2688
- Publication date:
- 2020-06-23
- Acceptance date:
- 2020-04-27
- DOI:
- EISSN:
-
1460-2091
- ISSN:
-
0305-7453
- Language:
-
English
- Keywords:
- Pubs id:
-
1102144
- Local pid:
-
pubs:1102144
- Deposit date:
-
2020-04-28
- ARK identifier:
Terms of use
- Copyright holder:
- Borek et al.
- Copyright date:
- 2020
- Rights statement:
- © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.
- Notes:
- This is the accepted manuscript version of the article. The final version is available online from Oxford University Press at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkaa224
If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record