MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Do pay-for-performance schemes improve quality in community pharmacy? A mixed-methods study exploring stakeholder perspectives on implementation of the nationwide Pharmacy Quality Scheme (PQS) in England?
Do pay-for-performance schemes improve quality in community pharmacy? A mixed-methods study exploring stakeholder perspectives on implementation of the nationwide Pharmacy Quality Scheme (PQS) in England?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Do pay-for-performance schemes improve quality in community pharmacy? A mixed-methods study exploring stakeholder perspectives on implementation of the nationwide Pharmacy Quality Scheme (PQS) in England?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Do pay-for-performance schemes improve quality in community pharmacy? A mixed-methods study exploring stakeholder perspectives on implementation of the nationwide Pharmacy Quality Scheme (PQS) in England?
Do pay-for-performance schemes improve quality in community pharmacy? A mixed-methods study exploring stakeholder perspectives on implementation of the nationwide Pharmacy Quality Scheme (PQS) in England?

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Do pay-for-performance schemes improve quality in community pharmacy? A mixed-methods study exploring stakeholder perspectives on implementation of the nationwide Pharmacy Quality Scheme (PQS) in England?
Do pay-for-performance schemes improve quality in community pharmacy? A mixed-methods study exploring stakeholder perspectives on implementation of the nationwide Pharmacy Quality Scheme (PQS) in England?
Journal Article

Do pay-for-performance schemes improve quality in community pharmacy? A mixed-methods study exploring stakeholder perspectives on implementation of the nationwide Pharmacy Quality Scheme (PQS) in England?

2025
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
To evaluate implementation and impact (at pharmacy and system level) of the pharmacy quality scheme (PQS), a pay-for-performance quality incentive scheme in community pharmacies in England since 2017. Mixed-methods evaluation. Three linked datasets for 2021/22 (n = 10,135) were analysed for impact of pharmacy size, type (independent, chain, supermarket), location, prescription volume, and region on PQS participation, domains completion and payments. Forty-one qualitative interviews conducted with pharmacists, employers and representative bodies explored views and experiences of PQS implementation and impact. Harrington et al.'s conceptual framework for evaluating community pharmacy pay-for-performance programmes guided qualitative data analysis. Nearly all community pharmacies in England participated in PQS, with differences identified between chains (99% participation) and independents (16.5%), with income via PQS being an important motivator. Interviewees agreed with policy-makers about the purpose of the PQS being patient safety, patient experience, and clinical effectiveness. Beyond these core dimensions, consistency of service provision, sustainability, and wider system integration were considered important. While PQS was largely viewed as positively impacting pharmacy teams, clinical practice, and patient care, interviewees felt that increasing workloads across the sector made it challenging to focus on quality. They felt that there was a lack of feedback, that impacts were not always visible, and indeed frontline pharmacists were often not aware of published evidence of PQS impacts. Multiple sources of guidance lead to duplication and confusion. Particularly independent pharmacies found PQS workload burdensome and complex. The primary incentive for PQS engagement revolved around income stability for employers, with some positive impact achieved, but obstacles concerning resource implications and sustainability persist. Considering concerns about the viability of community pharmacy and the importance of increasing the scope of pharmaceutical services, these implementation challenges should lead policy-makers to question how best to incentivise quality.