Darzi centres skew QOF pay weighting

The establishment of Darzi centres undermined the weighting of QOF pay and has left some practices facing losses worth thousands of pounds.

Dr  Bailey: 'Darzi centres may not have benefited financially but are responsible for the skewing of QOF prevalence figures' (Photograph: JH Lancy)
Dr Bailey: 'Darzi centres may not have benefited financially but are responsible for the skewing of QOF prevalence figures' (Photograph: JH Lancy)

Rapidly growing patient lists at the centres skewed the way their prevalence was calculated for 2009/10, and left some with ‘extraordinarily high prevalence’, a GPC document reveals.

Some health centres recorded prevalence of up to 200% for disease domains. All practices in the bottom 5% of the range of prevalence nationally receive the same QOF pay weighting.

Because the outliers were so extreme, many practices with prevalence well above national average will have received the same weighting on points in the worst-hit domains as those with zero prevalence. Vascular domains and the hypothyroid domain are understood to have been heavily hit.

GPC negotiator Dr David Bailey said the problem had caused ‘significant variations’ in QOF pay. High prevalence practices may have lost thousands of pounds, while those with low prevalence gained.

Dr Bailey said Darzi centres may not have benefited financially but ‘are just responsible for the skewing of [QOF prevalence figures]’.

Expanding practices can record abnormally high prevalence because it is calculated by dividing the number of patients on a disease register on 31 March by the practice’s registered population on 1 January.

If a practice list grows rapidly between these dates, prevalence for disease areas can be substantially skewed.

The GPC document explains: ‘A new practice with just 10 patients on 1 January but which has grown by 31 March to include 11 patients with thyroid disease, would have a prevalence of 110%.’

Jon Ford, head of the BMA's health policy and economic research unit, said some practices recorded prevalence of 200% in disease domains. ‘The prevalence was unfeasibly large, which makes a nonsense of it. People will have lost out,’ he said.

Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register

Already registered?

Sign in

Follow Us:

Just published

LMCs demand renegotiation of COVID-19 enhanced service deal

LMCs demand renegotiation of COVID-19 enhanced service deal

LMCs have called for a renegotiation of funding for the COVID-19 vaccination enhanced...

LMCs demand ballot of profession on PCN DES ahead of next contract talks

LMCs demand ballot of profession on PCN DES ahead of next contract talks

LMCs have demanded a ballot of GPs on the primary care network (PCN) DES before BMA...

Lack of support left locums at physical and financial risk in pandemic, say LMCs

Lack of support left locums at physical and financial risk in pandemic, say LMCs

Locum GPs have faced significant physical and financial risk because of a lack of...

LMCs demand NHS England apology over ‘abhorrent' claims about general practice

LMCs demand NHS England apology over ‘abhorrent' claims about general practice

LMCs have called on NHS England to apologise for ‘abhorrent and insulting’ suggestions...

CCGs to be stripped of commissioning role under reforms backed by NHS England

CCGs to be stripped of commissioning role under reforms backed by NHS England

CCGs could be stripped of their commissioning role under plans set out by NHS England,...

Shielding advice updated to reflect return to tiered system on 2 December

Shielding advice updated to reflect return to tiered system on 2 December

The government has updated its guidance for patients on the shielding list to reflect...