The Effects of Pay-for-Performance Programs on Health, Health Care Use, and Processes of Care

被引:248
作者
Mendelson, Aaron [2 ]
Kondo, Karli [1 ]
Damberg, Cheryl [3 ]
Low, Allison [1 ]
Motuapuaka, Makalapua [1 ]
Freeman, Michele [1 ]
O'Neil, Maya [1 ]
Relevo, Rose [1 ]
Kansagara, Devan [1 ]
机构
[1] VA Portland Hlth Care Syst, Mail Code R&D 71,3710 SW US Vet Hosp Rd, Portland, OR 97239 USA
[2] Oregon Hlth & Sci Univ, Mail Code MDYCHSE,3181 SW Sam Jackson Pk Rd, Portland, OR 97239 USA
[3] RAND Hlth, 1776 Main St, Santa Monica, CA 90407 USA
关键词
FINANCIAL INCENTIVES; OUTCOMES FRAMEWORK; DIABETES CARE; QUALITY INCENTIVES; HOSPITAL PAY; RISK-FACTORS; LONG-TERM; IMPACT; PHYSICIANS; ENGLAND;
D O I
10.7326/M16-1881
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: The benefits of pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are uncertain. Purpose: To update and expand a prior review examining the effects of P4P programs targeted at the physician, group, managerial, or institutional level on process-of-care and patient outcomes in ambulatory and inpatient settings. Data Sources: PubMed from June 2007 to October 2016; MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Business Economics and Theory, Business Source Elite, Scopus, Faculty of 1000, and Gartner Research from June 2007 to February 2016. Study Selection: Trials and observational studies in ambulatory and inpatient settings reporting process-of-care, health, or utilization outcomes. Data Extraction: Two investigators extracted data, assessed study quality, and graded the strength of the evidence. Data Synthesis: Among 69 studies, 58 were in ambulatory settings, 52 reported process-of-care outcomes, and 38 reported patient outcomes. Low-strength evidence suggested that P4P programs in ambulatory settings may improve process-of-care outcomes over the short term (2 to 3 years), whereas data on longer-term effects were limited. Many of the positive studies were conducted in the United Kingdom, where incentives were larger than in the United States. The largest improvements were seen in areas where baseline performance was poor. There was no consistent effect of P4P on intermediate health outcomes (low-strength evidence) and insufficient evidence to characterize any effect on patient health outcomes. In the hospital setting, there was low-strength evidence that P4P had little or no effect on patient health outcomes and a positive effect on reducing hospital readmissions. Limitation: Few methodologically rigorous studies; heterogeneous population and program characteristics and incentive targets. Conclusion: Pay-for-performance programs may be associated with improved processes of care in ambulatory settings, but consistently positive associations with improved health outcomes have not been demonstrated in any setting.
引用
收藏
页码:341 / +
页数:14
相关论文
共 94 条
  • [1] Effect of a UK Pay-for-Performance Program on Ethnic Disparities in Diabetes Outcomes: Interrupted Time Series Analysis
    Alshamsan, Riyadh
    Lee, John Tayu
    Majeed, Azeem
    Netuveli, Gopalakrishnan
    Millett, Christopher
    [J]. ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2012, 10 (03) : 228 - 234
  • [2] Augmenting the Impact of Technology Adoption With Financial Incentive to Improve Radiology Report Signature Times
    Andriole, Katherine P.
    Prevedello, Luciano M.
    Dufault, Allen
    Pezeshk, Parham
    Bransfield, Robert
    Hanson, Richard
    Doubilet, Peter M.
    Seltzer, Steven E.
    Khorasani, Ramin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2010, 7 (03) : 198 - 204
  • [3] Impact of Pay for Performance on Prescribing of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception in Primary Care: An Interrupted Time Series Study
    Arrowsmith, Myat E.
    Majeed, Azeem
    Lee, John Tayu
    Saxena, Sonia
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (04):
  • [4] Effect of Financial Incentives to Physicians, Patients, or Both on Lipid Levels A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Asch, David A.
    Troxel, Andrea B.
    Stewart, Walter F.
    Sequist, Thomas D.
    Jones, James B.
    Hirsch, AnneMarie G.
    Hoffer, Karen
    Zhu, Jingsan
    Wang, Wenli
    Hodlofski, Amanda
    Frasch, Antonette B.
    Weiner, Mark G.
    Finnerty, Darra D.
    Rosenthal, Meredith B.
    Gangemi, Kelsey
    Volpp, Kevin G.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2015, 314 (18): : 1926 - 1935
  • [5] Sustainability of Quality Improvement Following Removal of Pay-for-Performance Incentives
    Benzer, Justin K.
    Young, Gary J.
    Burgess, James F., Jr.
    Baker, Errol
    Mohr, David C.
    Charns, Martin P.
    Kaboli, Peter J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2014, 29 (01) : 127 - 132
  • [6] Berkman ND, 2013, AHRQ PUBLICATION
  • [7] Effect of the quality and outcomes framework on diabetes care in the United Kingdom: retrospective cohort study
    Calvert, Melanie
    Shankar, Aparna
    McManus, Richard J.
    Lester, Helen
    Freemantle, Nick
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2009, 338 : 1366 - 1370
  • [8] US Physician Practices Spend More Than $15.4 Billion Annually To Report Quality Measures
    Casalino, Lawrence P.
    Gans, David
    Weber, Rachel
    Cea, Meagan
    Tuchovsky, Amber
    Bishop, Tara F.
    Miranda, Yesenia
    Frankel, Brittany A.
    Ziehler, Kristina B.
    Wong, Meghan M.
    Evenson, Todd B.
    [J]. HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2016, 35 (03) : 401 - 406
  • [9] A Pay-For-Performance Program In Taiwan Improved Care For Some Diabetes Patients, But Doctors May Have Excluded Sicker Ones
    Chang, Ray-E.
    Lin, Shih-Pi
    Aron, David Clark
    [J]. HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2012, 31 (01) : 93 - 102
  • [10] Does pay-for-performance benefit patients with multiple chronic conditions? Evidence from a universal coverage health care system
    Chen, Chi-Chen
    Cheng, Shou-Hsia
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY AND PLANNING, 2016, 31 (01) : 83 - 90