title: How do we compare? Applying UK pay for performance indicators to an Australian general practice.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  United Kingdom general practitioners receive payment based on their performance in multiple clinical indicators. We set out to apply the same indicators in an Australian general practice to benchmark our performance and to see how much work was required to obtain the data.
  
  
  METHODS
  Clinical indicators for the 2008-2009 UK Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) cycle were examined and achievement levels measured in a large rural Australian general practice, mainly by computer searching of the clinical database.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Outcome measures were obtainable for 79 out of 80 indicators. Manual perusal of computer records was required for 16 indicators. Data collection takes approximately 130 hours. The Australian general practice achieved 66% of available pay for performance points compared to the UK average of 97%.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  United Kingdom QOF clinical data is obtainable relatively easily in a well computerised Australian rural general practice. The exercise identified significant areas in which clinical performance could be improved.
authors.affiliation: adrian.elliotsmith@gmail.com
authors.forename: Adrian
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Elliot-Smith
authors.forename: Mark A J
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Morgan
mesh_terms: D000554:Ambulatory Care Facilities; D019992:Databases as Topic; D005194:Family Practice / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards*; D006291:Health Policy; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care / Q000191:economics*; D019984:Quality Indicators, Health Care; D012052:Reimbursement, Incentive; D013021:South Australia; D006113:United Kingdom