Table 1 Key sources of statements for the RAND consensus panel
Source | Description | Relevance to a toolkit for patient safety in general practice |
|---|---|---|
PMCPA Primary Medical Care Provider Accreditation [12]. Multiple statements and indicators regarding quality, some also address safety issues. | The RCGP (Royal College of General Practitioners) commissioned the University of Manchester to begin work on this quality assessment scheme in 2007. PMCPA version 1 has been piloted in 36 UK practices, half of the practices achieved ≥90% on core criteria, 9 practices achieved 100%. The data from the pilot shows that practices were able to meet the criteria. | The researchers liaised with the CQC (Care Quality Commission) to ensure that the development of PMPCA was relevant to future national aims for general practice. |
EPA European Practice Assessment [13]. 57 quality statements relating to general practice. | A framework for general practice management made up of quality indicators shared by six European countries. Indicators were derived from a two-round postal Delphi questionnaire in general practice settings in Belgium, France, Germany, The Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom using the Rand Appropriateness Method. | A number of the indicators might be considered in a safety context, this work was also used to inform the PMCPA. TOPAS Europe are a Dutch organisation who are implementing and extending EPA, see; http://www.topaseurope.eu/ |
Multiple prescribing literature sources [14] | RAND consensus output and documents from UK organisations such as NPSA (National Patient Safety Agency) and BNF (British National Formulary). Reports of trials of interventions to improve medications management. | Results of a RAND process focusing exclusively on indicators that are drug specific will be published separately, indicators in relation to safety of prescribing systems (especially electronic systems) and medicines management were considered here. |
Multiple resources on interface of general practice and secondary care e.g [15] | Focus on the literature relevant to general practice, mostly small intervention pilot studies and guidelines. | Indicators were only considered if they were under the direct control of the family practitioner, for example, offering a review post discharge. |