Do hospitals alter patient care effort allocations under pay-for-performance?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Nicholas LH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3034262 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Do hospitals alter patient care effort allocations under pay-for-performance?
Nicholas Lauren Hersch LH Dimick Justin B JB Iwashyna Theodore J TJ
Health services research 20101028 1 Pt 1
<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether hospitals increase efforts on easy tasks relative to difficult tasks to improve scores under pay-for-performance (P4P) incentives.<h4>Data source</h4>The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital Compare data from Fiscal Years 2003 through 2005 and 2003 American Hospital Association Annual Survey data.<h4>Study design</h4>We classified measures of process compliance targeted by the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration as easy or diffic ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)/Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration (HQID) project aims to improve clinical performance through a pay-for-performance program. We conducted this study to identify the key organizational factors associated with higher performance.MethodsAn investigator-blinded, structured telephone survey of eligible hospitals' (N = 92) quality improvement (QI) leaders was conducted among HQID hospitals in the top 2 or bottom 2 deciles submitting performance measure data from October 2004 to September 2005. The survey covered topics such as QI interventions, data feedback, physician leadership, support for QI efforts, and organizational culture.ResultsMore top performing hospitals used clinical pathways for the treatment of AMI (49% vs. 15%, p < 0.01), HF (44% vs. 18%, p < 0.01), PN (38% vs. 13%, p < 0.01) and THR/TKR (56% vs. 23%, p < 0.01); organized into multidisciplinary teams to manage patients with AMI (93% vs. 77%, p < 0.05) and HF (93% vs. 69%, p < 0.01); used order sets for the treatment of THR/TKR (91% vs. 64%, p < 0.01); and implemented computerized physician order entry in the hospital (24.4% vs. 7.9%, p < 0.05). Finally, more top performers reported having adequate human resources for QI projects (p < 0.01); support of the nursing staff to increase adherence to quality indicators (p < 0.01); and an organizational culture that supported coordination of care (p < 0.01), pace of change (p < 0.01), willingness to try new projects (p < 0.01), and a focus on identifying system errors rather than blaming individuals (p < 0.05).ConclusionsOrganizational structure, support, and culture are associated with high performance among hospitals participating in a pay-for-performance demonstration project. Multiple organizational factors remain important in optimizing clinical care.
| S-EPMC2695536 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceMedicare's End-Stage Renal Disease Quality Incentive Program incorporates measures of perceived value into reimbursement calculations. In 2016, patient experience became a clinical measure in the Quality Incentive Program scoring system. Dialysis facility performance in patient experience measures has not been studied at the national level to date.ObjectiveTo examine associations among dialysis facility performance with patient experience measures and patient, facility, and geographic characteristics.DesignIn this cross-sectional analysis, patients from a national end-stage renal disease registry receiving in-center hemodialysis in the United States on December 31, 2014, were linked with dialysis facility scores on the In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH-CAHPS) survey. Of 4977 US dialysis facilities, 2939 (59.1%) reported ICH-CAHPS scores from April 8, 2015, through January 11, 2016. Multivariable linear regression models with geographic random effects were used to examine associations of facility ICH-CAHPS scores with patient, dialysis facility, and geographic characteristics and to identify the amount of total between-facility variation in patient experience scores explained by these categories. Data were analyzed from September 15, 2017, through June 1, 2018.ExposuresDialysis facility, geographic characteristic, and 10% change in patient characteristics.Main outcomes and measuresDialysis facility ICH-CAHPS scores and the total between-facility variation explained by different categories of characteristics.ResultsOf the 2939 facilities included in the analysis, adjusted mean ICH-CAHPS scores were 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 1.5-3.7) lower in for-profit facilities, 1.6 percentage points (95% CI, 0.9-2.2) lower in facilities owned by large dialysis organizations, and 2.3 percentage points (95% CI, 0.5-4.2) lower in free-standing facilities compared with their counterparts. More nurses per patient was associated with 0.2 percentage points (95% CI, 0.03-0.3) higher scores; a privately insured patient population was associated with 1.2 percentage points (95% CI, 0.2-2.2) higher scores. Facilities with higher proportions of black patients had 0.95 percentage points (95% CI, 0.78-1.12) lower scores; more Native American patients, 1.00 percentage point (95% CI, 0.39-1.60) lower facility scores. Geographic location and dialysis facility characteristics explained larger proportions of the overall between-facility variation in ICH-CAHPS scores than did patient characteristics.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that for-profit operation, free-standing status, and large dialysis organization designation were associated with less favorable patient-reported experiences of care. Patient experience scores varied geographically, and black and Native American populations reported less favorable experiences. The study findings suggest that perceived quality of care delivered in these settings are of concern, and that there may be opportunities for improved implementation of patient experience surveys as is highlighted.
| S-EPMC6233760 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To determine the impact of the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) program-the US pay for performance program introduced by Medicare to incentivize higher quality care-on 30 day mortality for three incentivized conditions: acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia.Observational study.4267 acute care hospitals in the United States: 2919 participated in the HVBP program and 1348 were ineligible and used as controls (44 in general hospitals in Maryland and 1304 critical access hospitals across the United States).2?430?618 patients admitted to US hospitals from 2008 through 2013.30 day risk adjusted mortality for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia using a patient level linear spline analysis to examine the association between the introduction of the HVBP program and 30 day mortality. Non-incentivized, medical conditions were the comparators. A secondary outcome measure was to determine whether the introduction of the HVBP program was particularly beneficial for a subgroup of hospital-poor performers at baseline-that may benefit the most.Mortality rates of incentivized conditions in hospitals participating in the HVBP program declined at -0.13% for each quarter during the preintervention period and -0.03% point difference for each quarter during the post-intervention period. For non-HVBP hospitals, mortality rates declined at -0.14% point difference for each quarter during the preintervention period and -0.01% point difference for each quarter during the post-intervention period. The difference in the mortality trends between the two groups was small and non-significant (difference in difference in trends -0.03% point difference for each quarter, 95% confidence interval -0.08% to 0.13% point difference, P=0.35). In no subgroups of hospitals was HVBP associated with better outcomes, including poor performers at baseline.Evidence that HVBP has led to lower mortality rates is lacking. Nations considering similar pay for performance programs may want to consider alternative models to achieve improved patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC4861084 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundPay for performance (P4P) programs have shown only modest improvements in outcomes and do not target patient behaviors. Many large employers and payers are turning to pay for performance for patients (P4P4P) to reduce health costs and improve the health of their covered populations. How these programs may be perceived by patients is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess patients' opinion of the acceptability of P4P4P.DesignCross-sectional self-administered survey.ParticipantsPatients in waiting rooms in two university-based primary care clinics.MeasurementsParticipants were asked their opinions about paying people to quit smoking, lose weight, control their blood pressure, or control their diabetes.ResultsRespondents were split on whether P4P4P is desirable. Thirty-six to 42% thought it was a good/excellent idea to pay smokers to quit smoking, obese people to lose weight, people with hypertension to control their blood pressure, or people with diabetes to control their blood sugar, while 41-44% of the sample thought it was a bad/very bad idea. Smokers and patients who were obese endorsed P4P4P more favorably as a means to achieving tobacco cessation and weight loss than their non-smoking and non-obese counterparts.ConclusionsAcceptance of paying patients for performance by the general population is equivocal. Establishing the efficacy of paying patients for performance may help it gain wider acceptance.
| S-EPMC2533373 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pay for performance (P4P) has become a popular strategy to reward quality and cost-efficiency in behavioral health care and other health care disciplines. This column presents the results of a literature review of P4P in behavioral health care. Fifteen empirical studies evaluating the outcomes of behavioral health services provided in a P4P system were identified. The limited data suggest that P4P can achieve its desired effect. More research is needed on outcomes, performance, and unintended consequences.
| S-EPMC7043926 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:As the geriatric population grows, the need for hospitals performing high quality emergency general surgery (EGS) on older patients will increase. Identifying clusters of high-performing geriatric emergency general surgery hospitals would substantiate the need for in-depth analyses of hospital-specific structures and practices that benefit older EGS patients. The objectives of this study were therefore to identify clusters of hospitals based on mortality performance for geriatric patients undergoing common EGS operations and to determine if hospital performance was similar for all operation types. METHODS:Hospitals in the California State Inpatient Database were included if they performed a range of eight common EGS operations in patients 65 years or older, with a minimum requirement of three of each operation performed over 2 years. Multivariable beta regression models were created to define hospital-level risk-adjusted mortality. Centroid cluster analysis was used to identify groups of hospitals based on mortality and to determine if mortality-performance differed by operation. RESULTS:One hundred seven hospitals were included, performing a total of 24,279 operations in older patients. Hospitals separated into three distinct clusters: high, average, and low performers. The high-performing hospitals had survival rates 1 to 2 standard deviations better than the low-performers (p < 0.001). For each cluster, high performance in any one EGS operation consistently translated into high performance across all EGS operations. CONCLUSION:Hospitals conducting EGS operations in the geriatric patient population cluster into three distinct groups based on their survival performance. High-performing hospitals significantly outperform the average and low performers across every operation. The high-performers achieve reliable, high-quality results regardless of operation type. Further qualitative research is needed to investigate the perioperative drivers of hospital performance in the geriatric EGS population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Study Type Prognostic, level III.
| S-EPMC7656193 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA better understanding of the attributes of patients who require more effort to manage may improve risk adjustment approaches and lead to more efficient resource allocation, improved patient care and health outcomes, and reduced burnout in primary care clinicians.ObjectiveTo identify and characterize high-effort patients from the physician's perspective.DesignCohort study.ParticipantsNinety-nine primary care physicians in an academic primary care network.Main measuresFrom a list of 100 randomly selected patients in their panels, PCPs identified patients who required a high level of team-based effort and patients they considered complex. For high-effort patients, PCPs indicated which factors influenced their decision: medical/care coordination, behavioral health, and/or socioeconomic factors. We examined differences in patient characteristics based on PCP-defined effort and complexity.Key resultsAmong 9594 eligible patients, PCPs classified 2277 (23.7 %) as high-effort and 2676 (27.9 %) as complex. Behavioral health issues were the major driver of effort in younger patients, while medical/care coordination issues predominated in older patients. Compared to low-effort patients, high-effort patients were significantly (P < 0.01 for all) more likely to have higher rates of medical (e.g. 23.2 % vs. 6.3 % for diabetes) and behavioral health problems (e.g. 9.8 % vs. 2.9 % for substance use disorder), more frequent primary care visits (10.9 vs. 6.0 visits), and higher acute care utilization rates (25.8 % vs. 7.7 % for emergency department [ED] visits and 15.0 % vs. 3.9 % for hospitalization). Almost one in five (18 %) patients who were considered high-effort were not deemed complex by the same PCPs.ConclusionsPatients defined as high-effort by their primary care physicians, not all of whom were medically complex, appear to have a high burden of psychosocial issues that may not be accounted for in current chronic disease-focused risk adjustment approaches.
| S-EPMC5331004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of a "piece-rate" pay-for-performance (P4P) program aimed at rewarding up-to-date immunization delivery to 2-year-olds according to the recommended series.Data sources/study settingPlan-level data from New York State's Quality Assurance Reporting Requirement and claims data from Hudson Health Plan for 2003-2007. In 2003 Hudson Health Plan, a not-for-profit Medicaid-focused managed care plan, introduced a U.S.$200 bonus payment for each fully immunized 2-year-old and provided administrative supports for identifying children who may need immunization. This represented a potential bonus of 15-25 percent above base reimbursement for eligible 2-year-olds.Study designCase-comparison and interrupted times series.Principal findingsImmunization rates within Hudson Health Plan rose at a significantly, albeit modestly, higher rate than the robust secular trend noted among comparison health plans. Supplementary analyses suggest that there was no significant change in preexisting disparities during the study period, and that children with chronic conditions have significantly greater odds of being fully immunized during the entire study period.ConclusionsThis study suggests that a piece-rate P4P program with appropriate administrative supports can be effective at improving childhood immunization rates.
| S-EPMC3029849 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient-centred care and patient autonomy is one of the key factors to better quality of service provision, hence patient outcomes. It enables the development of patients' trusts which is an important element to a better doctor-patient relationship. Given the increasing number of patient disputes and conflicts between patients and doctors in Chinese public hospital, it is timely to ensure patient-centred care is fully and successfully implemented. However, limited studies have examined the views and practice in different aspects of patient-centred care among doctors in the Chinese public hospitals.MethodsA quantitative approach was adopted by distributing paper-based questionnaires to doctors and patients in two hospitals (Level III and Level II) in Jinan, Shandong province, China.ResultsIn total, 614 doctors from the surgical and internal medicine units of the two hospitals participated in the survey yielding 90% response rates. The study confirmed the inconsistent views among doctors in terms of their perception and practice in various aspects patient-centred care and patient autonomy regardless of the hospital where they work (category II or category III), their unit speciality (surgical or non-surgical), their gender or seniority. The high proportion of doctors (more than 20%) who did not perceive the importance of patient consultation prior to determining diagnostic and treatment procedure is alarming. This in in part due to the belief held by more than half of the doctors that patients were unable to make rational decisions and their involvement in treatment planning process did not necessarily lead to better treatment outcomes.ConclusionThe study calls for the development of system level policy and organisation wide strategies in encouraging and enabling the practice of patient-centred care and patient autonomy with the purposes of improving the quality of the service provided to patients by Chinese hospitals.
| S-EPMC8994393 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany governments have introduced pay-for-performance programmes to incentivise health providers to improve quality of care. Evidence on whether these programmes reduce or exacerbate disparities in health care is scarce. In this study, we aimed to assess socioeconomic inequalities in the performance of family health teams under Brazil's National Programme for Improving Primary Care Access and Quality (PMAQ).MethodsFor this longitudinal study, we analysed data on the quality of care delivered by family health teams participating in PMAQ over three rounds of implementation: round 1 (November, 2011, to March, 2013), round 2 (April, 2013, to September, 2015), and round 3 (October, 2015, to December, 2019). The primary outcome was the percentage of the maximum performance score obtainable by family health teams (the PMAQ score), based on several hundred (ranging from 598 to 914) indicators of health-care delivery. Using census data on household income of local areas, we examined the PMAQ score by income ventile. We used ordinary least squares regressions to examine the association between PMAQ scores and the income of each local area across implementation rounds, and we did an analysis of variance to assess geographical variation in PMAQ score.FindingsOf the 40 361 family health teams that were registered as ever participating in PMAQ, we included 13 934 teams that participated in the three rounds of PMAQ in our analysis. These teams were located in 11 472 census areas and served approximately 48 million people. The mean PMAQ score was 61·0% (median 61·8, IQR 55·3-67·9) in round 1, 55·3% (median 56·0, IQR 47·6-63·4) in round 2, and 61·6% (median 62·7, IQR 54·4-69·9) in round 3. In round 1, we observed a positive socioeconomic gradient, with the mean PMAQ score ranging from 56·6% in the poorest group to 64·1% in the richest group. Between rounds 1 and 3, mean PMAQ performance increased by 7·1 percentage points for the poorest group and decreased by 0·8 percentage points for the richest group (p<0·0001), with the gap between richest and poorest narrowing from 7·5 percentage points (95% CI 6·5 to 8·5) to -0·4 percentage points over the same period (-1·6 to 0·8).InterpretationExisting income inequalities in the delivery of primary health care were eliminated during the three rounds of PMAQ, plausibly due to a design feature of PMAQ that adjusted financial payments for socioeconomic inequalities. However, there remains an important policy agenda in Brazil to address the large inequities in health.FundingUK Medical Research Council, Newton Fund, and CONFAP (Conselho Nacional das Fundações Estaduais de Amparo à Pesquisa).
| S-EPMC7900523 | biostudies-literature