A reporting framework for describing and a typology for categorizing and analyzing the designs of health care pay for performance schemes

Physicians' incentives, patients' characteristics, and quality of care: a systematic experimental comparison of performance-pay systems

How performance pay affects physicians' medical service provision and the quality of care is relevant for researchers and policy-makers alike. This paper systematically studies how performance pay, complementing either fee-for-service or capitation, affects physicians' medical service provision and the quality of care for heterogeneous patients. Using a series of controlled behavioral experiments with physicians and students, we test the incentive effect of performance pay at a within-subject level. We consider a performance pay scheme which grants a discrete bonus if a quality threshold is reached, which varies with the patients' severity of illness. We find that performance pay significantly reduces non-optimal service provision and enhances the quality of care. Effect sizes depend on the patients' severity of illness and whether performance pay is blended with fee-for-service or capitation. Health policy implications, including a cost benefit analysis of introducing performance pay, are discussed.

Modelling the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of pay-for-performance programs in health care

INTRODUCTION

With an upward trend in adoption by industrialized nations, pay-for-performance (P4P) mechanisms are increasingly recognized for fostering quality improvement in healthcare. P4P programs conventionally reward providers with supplemental payments upon achieving predefined performance targets. This study aims to utilize decision modelling to determine the cost-effectiveness and maximum incentive levels of P4P programs.

METHODS

A decision model, grounded in previously published models exploring the cost-effectiveness of implementation programs, was developed. The model evaluates the cost-effectiveness of P4P programs for an exogenous reward size under varied reward mechanisms and also in scenarios with and without a budget or time constraint.

RESULTS

In instances where P4P programs do not substitute other healthcare programs, their incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is deterministically set and ranges from treatment ICER to infinity, irrespective of the reward mechanism. With a budget or time constraint in play, the P4P program is incentivized up to the point where its population cost or ICER aligns with that of the program being replaced.

CONCLUSION

The proposed decision model effectively calculates the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of P4P programs, accommodating various reward mechanisms and scenarios, both with and without budget or time constraints.

Does pay-for-performance design matter? Evidence from Brazil

Pay-for-performance (P4P) schemes have been shown to have mixed effects on health care outcomes. A challenge in interpreting this evidence is that P4P is often considered a homogenous intervention, when in practice schemes vary widely in their design. Our study contributes to this literature by providing a detailed depiction of incentive design across municipalities within a national P4P scheme in Brazil [Primary Care Access and Quality (PMAQ)] and exploring the association of alternative design typologies with the performance of primary health care providers. We carried out a nation-wide survey of municipal health managers to characterize the scheme design, based on the size of the bonus, the providers incentivized and the frequency of payment. Using OLS regressions and controlling for municipality characteristics, we examined whether each design feature was associated with better family health team (FHT) performance. To capture potential interactions between design features, we used cluster analysis to group municipalities into five design typologies and then examined associations with quality of care. A majority of the municipalities included in our study used some of the PMAQ funds to provide bonuses to FHT workers, while the remaining municipalities spent the funds in the traditional way using input-based budgets. Frequent bonus payments (monthly) and higher size bonus allocations (share of 20-80%) were strongly associated with better team performance, while who within a team was eligible to receive bonuses did not in isolation appear to influence performance. The cluster analysis showed what combinations of design features were associated with better performance. The PMAQ score in the 'large bonus/many workers/high-frequency' cluster was 8.44 points higher than the 'no bonus' cluster, equivalent to a difference of 21.7% in the mean PMAQ score. Evidence from our study shows how design features can potentially influence health provider performance, informing the design of more effective P4P schemes.

Primary care providers' preferences for pay-for-performance programs: a discrete choice experiment study in Shandong China

BACKGROUND

Pay-for-performance (P4P) schemes are commonly used to incentivize primary healthcare (PHC) providers to improve the quality of care they deliver. However, the effectiveness of P4P schemes can vary depending on their design. In this study, we aimed to investigate the preferences of PHC providers for participating in P4P programs in a city in Shandong province, China.

METHOD

We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with 882 PHC providers, using six attributes: type of incentive, whom to incentivize, frequency of incentive, size of incentive, the domain of performance measurement, and release of performance results. Mixed logit models and latent class models were used for the statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Our results showed that PHC providers had a strong negative preference for fines compared to bonuses (- 1.91; 95%CI - 2.13 to - 1.69) and for annual incentive payments compared to monthly (- 1.37; 95%CI - 1.59 to - 1.14). Providers also showed negative preferences for incentive size of 60% of monthly income, group incentives, and non-release of performance results. On the other hand, an incentive size of 20% of monthly income and including quality of care in performance measures were preferred. We identified four distinct classes of providers with different preferences for P4P schemes. Class 2 and Class 3 valued most of the attributes differently, while Class 1 and Class 4 had a relatively small influence from most attributes.

CONCLUSION

P4P schemes that offer bonuses rather than fines, monthly rather than annual payments, incentive size of 20% of monthly income, paid to individuals, including quality of care in performance measures, and release of performance results are likely to be more effective in improving PHC performance. Our findings also highlight the importance of considering preference heterogeneity when designing P4P schemes.

Optimal Care for Kidney Health: Development of a Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) Value Pathway

The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) is a mandatory pay-for-performance program through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that aims to incentivize high-quality care, promote continuous improvement, facilitate electronic exchange of information, and lower health care costs. Previous research has highlighted several limitations of the MIPS program in assessing nephrology care delivery, including administrative complexity, limited relevance to nephrology care, and inability to compare performance across nephrology practices, emphasizing the need for a more valid and meaningful quality assessment program. This article details the iterative consensus-building process used by the American Society of Nephrology Quality Committee from May 2020 to July 2022 to develop the Optimal Care for Kidney Health MIPS Value Pathway (MVP). Two rounds of ranked-choice voting among Quality Committee members were used to select among nine quality metrics, 43 improvement activities, and three cost measures considered for inclusion in the MVP. Measure selection was iteratively refined in collaboration with the CMS MVP Development Team, and new MIPS measures were submitted through CMS's Measures Under Consideration process. The Optimal Care for Kidney Health MVP was published in the 2023 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Final Rule and includes measures related to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker use, hypertension control, readmissions, acute kidney injury requiring dialysis, and advance care planning. The nephrology MVP aims to streamline measure selection in MIPS and serves as a case study of collaborative policymaking between a subspecialty professional organization and national regulatory agencies.

Performance bonuses and the quality of primary health care delivered by family health teams in Brazil: A difference-in-differences analysis

BACKGROUND

Pay-for-performance (P4P) programmes to incentivise health providers to improve quality of care have been widely implemented globally. Despite intuitive appeal, evidence on the effectiveness of P4P is mixed, potentially due to differences in how schemes are designed. We exploited municipality variation in the design features of Brazil's National Programme for Improving Primary Care Access and Quality (PMAQ) to examine whether performance bonuses given to family health team workers were associated with changes in the quality of care and whether the size of bonus mattered.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

For this quasi-experimental study, we used a difference-in-differences approach combined with matching. We compared changes over time in the quality of care delivered by family health teams between (bonus) municipalities that chose to use some or all of the PMAQ money to provide performance-related bonuses to team workers with (nonbonus) municipalities that invested the funds using traditional input-based budgets. The primary outcome was the PMAQ score, a quality of care index on a scale of 0 to 100, based on several hundred indicators (ranging from 598 to 660) of health care delivery. We did one-to-one matching of bonus municipalities to nonbonus municipalities based on baseline demographic and economic characteristics. On the matched sample, we used ordinary least squares regression to estimate the association of any bonus and size of bonus with the prepost change over time (between November 2011 and October 2015) in the PMAQ score. We performed subgroup analyses with respect to the local area income of the family health team. The matched analytical sample comprised 2,346 municipalities (1,173 nonbonus municipalities; 1,173 bonus municipalities), containing 10,275 family health teams that participated in PMAQ from the outset. Bonus municipalities were associated with a 4.6 (95% CI: 2.7 to 6.4; p < 0.001) percentage point increase in the PMAQ score compared with nonbonus municipalities. The association with quality of care increased with the size of bonus: the largest bonus group saw an improvement of 8.2 percentage points (95% CI: 6.2 to 10.2; p < 0.001) compared with the control. The subgroup analysis showed that the observed improvement in performance was most pronounced in the poorest two-fifths of localities. The limitations of the study include the potential for bias from unmeasured time-varying confounding and the fact that the PMAQ score has not been validated as a measure of quality of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Performance bonuses to family health team workers compared with traditional input-based budgets were associated with an improvement in the quality of care.

Is value-based payment for healthcare feasible under Ghana's National Health Insurance Scheme?

BACKGROUND

Effective payment mechanisms for healthcare are critical to the quality of care and the efficiency and responsiveness of health systems to meet specific population health needs. Since its inception, Ghana's National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) has adopted fee-for-service, diagnostic-related groups and capitation methods, which have contributed to provider reimbursement delays, rising costs and poor quality of care rendered to the scheme's clients. The aim of this study was to explore stakeholder perceptions of the feasibility of value-based payment (VBP) for healthcare in Ghana. Value-based payment refers to a system whereby healthcare providers are paid for the value of services rendered to patients instead of the volume of services.

METHODS

This study employed a cross-sectional qualitative design. National-level stakeholders were purposively selected for in-depth interviews. The participants included policy-makers (n = 4), implementers (n = 5), public health insurers (n = 3), public and private healthcare providers (n = 7) and civil society organization officers (n = 1). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data analysis was performed using both deductive and inductive thematic analysis. The data were analysed using QSR NVivo 12 software.

RESULTS

Generally, participants perceived VBP to be feasible if certain supporting systems were in place and potential implementation constraints were addressed. Although the concept of VBP was widely accepted, study participants reported that efficient resource management, provider motivation incentives and community empowerment were required to align VBP to the Ghanaian context. Weak electronic information systems and underdeveloped healthcare infrastructure were seen as challenges to the integration of VBP into the Ghanaian health system. Therefore, improvement of existing systems beyond healthcare, including public education, politics, data, finance, regulation, planning, infrastructure and stakeholder attitudes towards VBP, will affect the overall feasibility of VBP in Ghana.

CONCLUSION

Value-based payment could be a feasible policy option for the NHIS in Ghana if potential implementation challenges such as limited financial and human resources and underdeveloped health system infrastructure are addressed. Governmental support and provider capacity-building are therefore essential for VBP implementation in Ghana. Future feasibility and acceptability studies will need to consider community and patient perspectives.

Is the evidence on the effectiveness of pay for performance schemes in healthcare changing? Evidence from a meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

This study investigated if the evidence on the success of the Pay for Performance (P4P) schemes in healthcare is changing as the schemes continue to evolve by updating a previous systematic review.

METHODS

A meta-regression analysis using 116 studies evaluating P4P schemes published between January 2010 to February 2018. The effects of the research design, incentive schemes, use of incentives, and the size of the payment to revenue ratio on the proportion of statically significant effects in each study were examined.

RESULTS

There was evidence of an increase in the range of countries adopting P4P schemes and weak evidence that the proportion of studies with statistically significant effects have increased. Factors hypothesized to influence the success of schemes have not changed. Studies evaluating P4P schemes which made payments for improvement over time, were associated with a lower proportion of statistically significant effects. There was weak evidence of a positive association between the incentives' size and the proportion of statistically significant effects.

CONCLUSION

The evidence on the effectiveness of P4P schemes is evolving slowly, with little evidence that lessons are being learned concerning the design and evaluation of P4P schemes.

What theories underpin performance-based financing? A scoping review

PURPOSE

The study aims to explore the theoretical bases justifying the use of performance-based financing (PBF) in the health sector in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The authors conducted a scoping review of the literature on PBF so as to identify the theories utilized to underpin it and analyzed its theoretical justifications.

FINDINGS

Sixty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Economic theories were predominant, with the principal-agent theory being the most commonly-used theory, explicitly referred to by two-thirds of included studies. Psychological theories were also common, with a wide array of motivation theories. Other disciplines in the form of management or organizational science, political and social science and systems approaches also contributed. However, some of the theories referred to contradicted each other. Many of the studies included only casually alluded to one or more theories, and very few used these theories to justify or support PBF. No theory emerged as a dominant, consistent and credible justification of PBF, perhaps except for the principal-agent theory, which was often inappropriately applied in the included studies, and when it included additional assumptions reflecting the contexts of the health sector in LMICs, might actually warn against adopting PBF.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Overall, this review has not been able to identify a comprehensive, credible, consistent, theoretical justification for using PBF rather than alternative approaches to health system reforms and healthcare providers' motivation in LMICs.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

The theoretical justifications of PBF in the health sector in LMICs are under-documented. This review is the first of this kind and should encourage further debate and theoretical exploration of the justifications of PBF.

How are pay-for-performance schemes in healthcare designed in low- and middle-income countries? Typology and systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Pay for performance (P4P) schemes provide financial incentives to health workers or facilities based on the achievement of pre-specified performance targets and have been widely implemented in health systems across low and middle-income countries (LMICs). The growing evidence base on P4P highlights that (i) there is substantial variation in the effect of P4P schemes on outcomes and (ii) there appears to be heterogeneity in incentive design. Even though scheme design is likely a key determinant of scheme effectiveness, we currently lack systematic evidence on how P4P schemes are designed in LMICs.

METHODS

We develop a typology to classify the design of P4P schemes in LMICs, which highlights different design features that are a priori likely to affect the behaviour of incentivised actors. We then use results from a systematic literature review to classify and describe the design of P4P schemes that have been evaluated in LMICs. To capture academic publications, Medline, Embase, and EconLit databases were searched. To include relevant grey literature, Google Scholar, Emerald Insight, and websites of the World Bank, WHO, Cordaid, Norad, DfID, USAID and PEPFAR were searched.

RESULTS

We identify 41 different P4P schemes implemented in 29 LMICs. We find that there is substantial heterogeneity in the design of P4P schemes in LMICs and pinpoint precisely how scheme design varies across settings. Our results also highlight that incentive design is not adequately being reported on in the literature - with many studies failing to report key design features.

CONCLUSIONS

We encourage authors to make a greater effort to report information on P4P scheme design in the future and suggest using the typology laid out in this paper as a starting point.