Quality in primary care (Qual Prim Care)

Publisher: Radcliffe Medical Press

Journal description

Quality in Primary Care (formerly The Journal of Clinical Governance) is the first European journal devoted solely to the topic of quality in primary healthcare. The journal is concerned with all aspects of quality in primary care and the interfaces between primary and secondary, and primary care and social care.


Journal Impact: 0.77*

*This value is calculated using ResearchGate data and is based on average citation counts from work published in this journal. The data used in the calculation may not be exhaustive.

Journal impact history

2016 Journal impact Available summer 2017
2015 Journal impact 0.77
2014 Journal impact 1.11
2013 Journal impact 1.10
2012 Journal impact 1.06
2011 Journal impact 1.14
2010 Journal impact 0.59
2009 Journal impact 0.42
2008 Journal impact 0.42
2007 Journal impact 0.22
2006 Journal impact 0.21
2005 Journal impact 0.29
2004 Journal impact 0.35

Journal impact over time

Journal impact
Year

Additional details

Cited half-life 0.00
Immediacy index 0.00
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.00
Website Quality in Primary Care website
Other titles Quality in primary care (Online), Quality in primary care
ISSN 1479-1072
OCLC 55061615
Material type Document, Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

This journal may support self-archiving.
Learn more

Publications in this journal

  • Article · Sep 2015 · Quality in primary care
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In the current financial climate faced by the NHS, it is important that we reduce the amount of inappropriate referrals made to secondary care specialties. ENT Emergency Clinics are one-stop clinics provided by many UK ENT departments to allow more rapid access to ENT services from primary care. However, many referrals to these clinics were considered to be inappropriate, overloading the clinic and delaying referrals to more specialist clinics. We conducted a service improvement project through introduction of referral guidelines and liaising with local GPs. We carried out an initial audit of ENT referrals over a one-month period, which suggested that 31% (69/225) of referrals were inappropriate. We developed a guideline referral proforma that included six specific conditions and details of subspecialist clinics available. This was circulated among GPs and A&E doctors and backed up by hospital teaching sessions. Two months later we repeated the audit. Following introduction of guidelines there was a significant reduction in inappropriate referrals from 31% (69/225) to 16% (28/179), p<0.01. Despite significant improvements overall, the proportion of inappropriate referrals from GPs remained higher than those from the local A&E department in both Cycle 1 (42% vs.24%, p<0.01) and Cycle 2 (23% vs. 5%, p<0.01). Devising and circulating guideline proformas in conjunction with local education for referring doctors may help reduce the number of inappropriate ENT referrals. This simple and cheap intervention could be used more widely and developed in primary care departments in partnership with local hospitals. Our study also highlights the challenges encountered when introducing new guidelines that affect referrals from doctors in the community. Increasing opportunities for GP trainees to gain some exposure to common conditions presenting to primary care might reduce inappropriate ENT referrals in the future.
    Article · Apr 2015 · Quality in primary care
  • Article · Apr 2015 · Quality in primary care