Secretaries of State for Health, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Working for patients. Cm.555. London: HMSO, 1989:40.
2.
Secretaries of State for Health, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Working for patients1989:39.
3.
DollRSir. Monitoring the National Health Service. Proc Roy Soc Med1973;66:729–40.
4.
BuckNDevlinHBLunnJN. The report of a confidential enquiry into perioperative deaths. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust and the King's Fund, 1987.
5.
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.Interim RCOG guidelines on medical audit. London: RCOG, 1990; Royal College of Physicians. Medical audit a first report: what, why and how 1989; Royal College of Surgeons. Guidelines to clinical audit in surgical practice 1989; Standing Committee on Postgraduate Medical Education. Medical audit: the educational implications 1989.
6.
PollittC. The politics of medical quality. Health Services Management Research1993 (in press).
7.
Royal College of Physicians.Medical audit a first report what, why and how. London: RCP, 1989:3.
8.
Royal College of Surgeons.Guidelines to clinical audit in surgical practice. London: RCS, 1989:3.
9.
Standing Committee on Postgraduate Medical Education.Medical audit: the educational implications. 1989:11.
10.
JostTS. Assuring the quality of medical practice: an international comparative study, Paper No. 82. London: King's Fund Project, 1990:70–1.
11.
JostTS. Assuring the quality of medical practice: an international comparative study. 1990:22–34.
12.
O'SullivanJ. Poor GPs to be retrained. Independent, 20 May 1992:2.
13.
HenkelM. Government, evaluation and change. London: Jessica Kingsley, 1991.
14.
Secretaries of State for Health, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland.Working for patients. Cm 555. London: HMSO, 1989:41.
15.
TomlinZ. Trust hospital fails to give care reports. Independent 16 March 1992:4.
16.
See, for example, FuchsB. Medicare's peer review organizations. Washington: Congressional Research Service, 1990 and Jost T. Policing cost containment: the Medicare peer review organizational program. University of Puget Sound Law Review 1991;14(3):483–526.