Today, the work of a physician specialized in family medicine is more and more subject to evaluation. Unfortunately there is no unified approach to dealing with the issue of quality, neither in family medicine, nor n general. The first aim of this paper was to present the general characteristics of quality and the issues of its determination, as well as how all of the above influence the possibilities of assessing the quality of work in family medicine. The second aim was to provide a review of the results of quality assessment for two chosen states: England and Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The main premise was the consideration that a study of quality has to lead to quality improvement, a perpetual process based on the awareness of all workers of the quality level of the care they provide, which constitutes the ground for its further improvement. This paper is divided into two main parts, general and specific, followed by the final part, which is essentially review of all important facts and dates mentioned in the paper. The general part dealt with the problems of defining quality and the effects which contribute to its relativity. A short review of the history of quality was also presented. Finally, quality was presented as feature of a particular element which enables it to satisfy specific user demands. In family medicine, quality is predominately analyzed through the model of domains, quantified by quality indicators. Advantages, as well as the disadvantages or limitations of this model were presented as part of this paper. In the specific part, general dates and health indicators for England and Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina were presented along with basic information about the structure of perspective health care systems. The results of quality assessment were presented according to the mentioned model of domains in form of tables. In the final part, most important points mentioned in the general part were highlighted. A comparative review of data mentioned in the specific part was presented in form of tables. Because direct comparison is not possible for all domains, comparison was done only for four domains. According to this, quality is better in England. For more precise comparison it is necessary to assess quality using the same system of quality indicators.