RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 A randomised trial of peer review: the UK National Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Resources and Outcomes Project
JF Clinical Medicine
JO Clin Med
FD Royal College of Physicians
SP 223
OP 227
DO 10.7861/clinmedicine.10-3-223
VO 10
IS 3
A1 CM Roberts
A1 RA Stone
A1 RJ Buckingham
A1 NA Pursey
A1 BDW Harrison
A1 D Lowe
A1 JM Potter
YR 2010
UL http://www.rcpjournals.org/content/10/3/223.abstract
AB Peer review has been widely employed within the NHS to facilitate health quality improvement but has not been rigorously evaluated. This article reports the largest randomised trial of peer review ever conducted in the UK. The peer review intervention was a reciprocal supportive exercise that included clinicians, hospital management, commissioners and patients which focused on the quality of the provision of four specific evidence-based aspects of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care. Follow up at 12 months demonstrated few quantitative differences in the number or quality of services offered in the two groups. Qualitative data in contrast suggested many benefits of peer review in most but not all intervention units and some control teams. Findings suggest peer review in this format is a positive experience for most participants but is ineffective in some situations. Its longer term benefits and cost effectiveness require further study. The generic findings of this study have potential implications for the application of peer review throughout the NHS.