Should measures of patient experience in primary care be adjusted for case mix? Evidence from the English General Practice Patient Survey
Open Access
- 23 May 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by BMJ in BMJ Quality & Safety
- Vol. 21 (8), 634-640
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000737
Abstract
Objectives Uncertainties exist about when and how best to adjust performance measures for case mix. Our aims are to quantify the impact of case-mix adjustment on practice-level scores in a national survey of patient experience, to identify why and when it may be useful to adjust for case mix, and to discuss unresolved policy issues regarding the use of case-mix adjustment in performance measurement in health care. Design/setting Secondary analysis of the 2009 English General Practice Patient Survey. Responses from 2 163 456 patients registered with 8267 primary care practices. Linear mixed effects models were used with practice included as a random effect and five case-mix variables (gender, age, race/ethnicity, deprivation, and self-reported health) as fixed effects. Main outcome measures Primary outcome was the impact of case-mix adjustment on practice-level means (adjusted minus unadjusted) and changes in practice percentile ranks for questions measuring patient experience in three domains of primary care: access; interpersonal care; anticipatory care planning, and overall satisfaction with primary care services. Results Depending on the survey measure selected, case-mix adjustment changed the rank of between 0.4% and 29.8% of practices by more than 10 percentile points. Adjusting for case-mix resulted in large increases in score for a small number of practices and small decreases in score for a larger number of practices. Practices with younger patients, more ethnic minority patients and patients living in more socio-economically deprived areas were more likely to gain from case-mix adjustment. Age and race/ethnicity were the most influential adjustors. Conclusions While its effect is modest for most practices, case-mix adjustment corrects significant underestimation of scores for a small proportion of practices serving vulnerable patients and may reduce the risk that providers would ‘cream-skim’ by not enrolling patients from vulnerable socio-demographic groups.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Geographic Variation in Diagnosis Frequency and Risk of Death Among Medicare BeneficiariesJAMA, 2011
- Patients' experience and satisfaction in primary care: secondary analysis using multilevel modellingBMJ, 2010
- Patient experience of access to primary care: identification of predictors in a national patient surveyBMC Family Practice, 2010
- The hospital standardised mortality ratio: a powerful tool for Dutch hospitals to assess their quality of care?Quality and Safety in Health Care, 2010
- Comparing and ranking hospitals based on outcome: results from The Netherlands Stroke SurveyQJM: An International Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Reliability of patient responses in pay for performance schemes: analysis of national General Practitioner Patient Survey data in EnglandBMJ, 2009
- Understanding why some ethnic minority patients evaluate medical care more negatively than white patients: a cross sectional analysis of a routine patient survey in English general practicesBMJ, 2009
- The GP Patient Survey for use in primary care in the National Health Service in the UK – development and psychometric characteristicsBMC Family Practice, 2009
- Effects of Survey Mode, Patient Mix, and Nonresponse on CAHPS® Hospital Survey ScoresHealth Services Research, 2009
- Case‐Mix Adjustment of Consumer Reports about Managed Behavioral Health Care and Health PlansHealth Services Research, 2008