Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 18, 2025
The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Effect of UK Quality and Outcomes Framework pay-for-performance programme on quality of primary care: systematic
Leonard Ho1, Stewart W Mercer2, David Henderson3
1NIHR Health Determinants Research Collaboration Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Objective:
To systematically review the one and three year impact on quality of care of the introduction and withdrawal of financial incentives in the UK Quality and Outcomes Framework pay-for-performance programme.
Design:
Systematic review with quantitative synthesis.
Data Sources:
MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases were searched from 1 January 2004 to 3 September 2024.
Study Selection:
Eligible studies used repeated cross sectional or cohort designs with consistent measurement before and after incentive introduction or withdrawal. Studies with a minimum of three time points before and after intervention were included in quantitative synthesis.
Data Extraction:
Analysis used both reported impact if available and de novo interrupted time series analysis of extracted raw data if not reported by the original study.
Data Synthesis:
Meta-analysis was not appropriate; findings were quantitatively synthesised by reporting medians and interquartile ranges of changes in quality or reported narratively. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Assessment Tool.
Results:
30 studies were included, with 11 providing data for quantitative synthesis. Across all indicators, evidence was found of improvement in recorded quality at one year after incentive introduction (83 indicators; median change compared with that predicted by pre-incentivisation trends 6.1 (interquartile range (IQR) 1.9 to 14.6) percentage points) but less consistently at three years (72 indicators; median change 0.7 (-2.1 to 8.9) percentage points). Impact was higher for process indicators with lower performance in the year before incentivisation. Incentive withdrawal was associated with reduction in recorded quality compared with predicted at both one year (31 indicators; median change -10.7 (IQR -17.9 to -3.8) percentage points) and three years (31 indicators; median change -12.8 (-21.0 to -4.4) percentage points). The largest changes with both incentive introduction and withdrawal were for complex process indicators such as diabetes foot screening, with smaller changes in simple processes such as blood pressure measurement, intermediate outcomes, and treatment indicators. For all types of indicators, the reduction in quality following incentive withdrawal generally matched or exceeded the gains observed after incentive introduction (for example, for 14 indicators with data for both, median change at three years for incentive introduction was a 1.4 (IQR -0.9 to 4.6) percentage point increase versus a 3.9 (IQR 2.2 to 11.6) decrease for incentive withdrawal).
Conclusion:
Quality and Outcomes Framework incentives consistently improved quality of care at one year beyond that predicted by pre-incentivisation trends, but by three years the impact was inconsistent and not clearly better than trend. Gains from incentivisation seemed to reverse after incentive withdrawal.
Study Registration:
Prospero CRD42023467627.
Related Concept Videos
01:30Primary Healthcare Services
In 1978, international leaders convened in Alma-Ata, Kazakhstan, for what would be a pivotal event in global health. The Alma-Ata Declaration was the first to call...
01:30Health Information Technology and Healthcare Information System
Health Information Technology, commonly called HIT, integrates advanced information systems and technology in healthcare settings. Its primary functions include:
01:11Secondary Healthcare System
01:11Purpose of Health Records I
Here's a breakdown of how health records serve these purposes:
01:26Methods Of Healthcare Delivery System
Managed Care System:
The managed care system is designed to control the cost while maintaining the quality of care. The patient's care from admission to discharge is planned by the primary care provider or the case manager, also known as the gatekeeper. In a managed care system, the number of care providers is...
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...