The use of physician financial incentives and feedback to improve pediatric preventive care in Medicaid managed care

Behavioral interventions for vaccination uptake: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Human behavior and more specifically behavioral insight-based approaches to vaccine uptake have often been overlooked. While there have been a few narrative reviews indexed in Medline on behavioral interventions to increase vaccine uptake, to our knowledge, none have been systematic reviews and meta-analyses covering not just high but also low-and-middle income countries.

METHODS

We included 613 studies from the Medline database in our systematic review and meta-analysis categorizing different behavioral interventions in 9 domains: education campaigns, on-site vaccination, incentives, free vaccination, institutional recommendation, provider recommendation, reminder and recall, message framing, and vaccine champion. Additionally, considering that there is variability in the acceptance of vaccines among different populations, we assessed studies from both high-income countries (HICs) and low- to middle-income countries (LMICs), separately.

FINDINGS

Our results showed that behavioral interventions can considerably improve vaccine uptake in most settings. All domains that we examined improved vaccine uptake with the highest effect size associated with provider recommendation (OR: 3.4 (95%CI: 2.5-4.6); Domain: motivation) and on-site vaccination (OR: 2.9 (95%CI: 2.3-3.7); Domain: practical issues). While the number of studies conducted in LMICs was smaller, the quality of studies was similar with those conducted in HICs. Nevertheless, there were variations in the observed effect sizes.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings indicate that "provider recommendation" and "on-site vaccination" along with other behavioral interventions can be employed to increase vaccination rates globally.

Recent Trends and Potential Drivers of Non-invasive Cardiovascular Imaging Use in the United States of America and England

Background: Non-invasive Cardiovascular imaging (NICI), including cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging provides important information to guide the management of patients with cardiovascular conditions. Current rates of NICI use and potential policy determinants in the United States of America (US) and England remain unexplored.

Methods: We compared NICI activity in the US (Medicare fee-for-service, 2011–2015) and England (National Health Service, 2012–2016). We reviewed recommendations related to CMR from Clinical Practice Guidelines, Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC), and Choosing Wisely. We then categorized recommendations according to whether CMR was the only recommended NICI technique (substitutable indications). Reimbursement policies in both settings were systematically collated and reviewed using publicly available information.

Results: The 2015 rate of NICI activity in the US was 3.1 times higher than in England (31,055 vs. 9,916 per 100,000 beneficiaries). The proportion of CMR of all NICI was small in both jurisdictions, but nuclear cardiac imaging was more frequent in the US in absolute and relative terms. American and European CPGs were similar, both in terms of number of recommendations and proportions of indications where CMR was not the only recommended NICI technique (substitutable indications). Reimbursement schemes for NICI activity differed for physicians and hospitals between the two settings.

Conclusions: Fee-for-service physician compensation in the US for NICI may contribute to higher NICI activity compared to England where physicians are salaried. Reimbursement arrangements for the performance of the test may contribute to the higher proportion of nuclear cardiac imaging out of the total NICI activity. Differences in CPG recommendations appear not to explain the variation in NICI activity between the US and England.

Evidence-based strategies to increase vaccination uptake: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize evidence-based strategies for improving pediatric immunization rates including physician behaviors, clinic and public health processes, community-based and parent-focused interventions, and legal and policy approaches RECENT FINDINGS: Studies continue to show the effectiveness of audit and feedback, provider reminders, standing orders, and reminder/recall to increase immunization rates. Provider communication strategies may improve immunization rates including use of a presumptive approach and motivational interviewing. Centralized reminder/recall (using a state Immunization Information System) is more effective and cost-effective compared to a practice-based approach. Recent work shows the success of text messages for reminder/recall for vaccination. Web-based interventions, including informational vaccine websites with interactive social media components, have shown effectiveness at increasing uptake of pediatric and maternal immunizations. Vaccination requirements for school attendance continue to be effective policy interventions for increasing pediatric and adolescent vaccination rates. Allowance for and ease of obtaining exemptions to vaccine requirements are associated with increased exemption rates.

SUMMARY

Strategies to increase vaccination rates include interventions that directly impact physician behavior, clinic and public health processes, patient behaviors, and policy. Combining multiple strategies to work across different settings and addressing different barriers may offer the best approach to optimize immunization coverage.

Cautionary study on the effects of pay for performance on quality of care: a pilot randomised controlled trial using standardised patients

BACKGROUND

Due to the difficulty of studying incentives in practice, there is limited empirical evidence of the full-impact pay-for-performance (P4P) incentive systems.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of P4P in a controlled, simulated environment.

DESIGN

We employed a simulation-based randomised controlled trial with three standardised patients to assess advanced practice providers' performance. Each patient reflected one of the following: (A) indicated for P4P screenings, (B) too young for P4P screenings, or (C) indicated for P4P screenings, but screenings are unrelated to the reason for the visit. Indication was determined by the 2016 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services quality measures.

INTERVENTION

The P4P group was paid $150 and received a bonus of $10 for meeting each of five outcome measures (breast cancer, colorectal cancer, pneumococcal, tobacco use and depression screenings) for each of the three cases (max $300). The control group received $200.

SETTING

Learning resource centre.

PARTICIPANTS

35 advanced practice primary care providers (physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and 105 standardised patient encounters.

MEASUREMENTS

Adherence to incentivised outcome measures, interpersonal communication skills, standards of care, and misuse.

RESULTS

patient was more likely to be prescribed screenings not indicated, but highlighted by P4P: breast cancer screening (47% P4P vs 0% control, p<0.01) and colorectal cancer screening (24% P4P vs 0% control, p=0.03). The P4P group over-reported completion of incentivised measures resulting in overpayment (average of $9.02 per patient).

LIMITATIONS

A small sample size and limited variability in patient panel limit the generalisability of findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings caution the adoption of P4P by highlighting the unintended consequences of the incentive system.

Interventions for Increasing the Quality of Preventive Care at a Free Clinic

A quality improvement committee targeted six clinically meaningful measures in order to determine which interventions improved preventative care in a free clinic as well as to qualify for certification as a Patient-Centered Medical Home. Four quality improvement interventions were designed and implemented. The outcomes of these interventions were compared with the national average performance and the Center for Disease Control's Healthy People 2020 goals. All outcomes measured exceeded the national averages, and five out of six outcomes were above the Healthy People 2020 goals. The approach outlined may be used by other free clinics aiming to provide quality preventive care for their patient population and to help obtain Patient-Centered Medical Home certifications.

Real-time Feedback in Pay-for-Performance: Does More Information Lead to Improvement?

BACKGROUND

Pay-for-performance (P4P) has been used expansively to improve quality of care delivered by physicians. However, to what extent P4P works through the provision of information versus financial incentives is poorly understood.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether an increase in information feedback without changes to financial incentives resulted in improved physician performance within an existing P4P program.

INTERVENTION/EXPOSURE

Implementation of a new registry enabling real-time feedback to physicians on quality measure performance.

DESIGN

Observational, predictive piecewise model at the physician-measure level to examine whether registry introduction associated with performance changes. We used detailed physician quality measure data 3 years prior to registry implementation (2010-2012) and 2 years after implementation (2014-2015). We also linked physician-level data including age, gender, and board certification; group-level data including registry click rates; and patient panel data including chronic conditions.

PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred thirty-four physicians continuously affiliated with Advocate from 2010 to 2015.

MAIN MEASURES

Physician performance on ten quality metrics.

KEY RESULTS

We found no consistent pattern of improvement associated with the availability of real-time information across ten measures. Relative to predicted performance without the registry, average performance increased for two measures (childhood immunization status-rotavirus (p < 0.001) and diabetes care-medical attention for nephropathy (p = 0.024)) and decreased for three measures (childhood immunization status-influenza (p < 0.001) and diabetes care-HbA1c testing (p < 0.001) and poor HbA1c control (p < 0.001)). Results were consistent for subgroup analysis on those most able to improve, i.e., physicians in the bottom tertile of performance prior to registry introduction. Physicians who improved most were in groups that accessed the registry more than those who improved least (8.0 vs 10.0 times per week, p = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

More frequent provision of information, provided in real-time, was insufficient to improve physician performance in an existing P4P program with high baseline performance. Results suggest that electronic registries may not themselves drive performance improvement. Future work should consider testing information feedback enhancements with financial incentives.

Knowledge Translation Strategies Used by Healthcare Professionals in Child Health Settings: An Updated Systematic Review

PROBLEM

Strategies assisting healthcare professionals to make evidence-based decisions are crucial for quality patient care and outcomes. To date, there is one systematic review (Albrecht et al., 2016) examining knowledge translation (KT) efforts in child health settings. This systematic review aims to provide an update on current evidence identifying KT interventions implementing research into child health settings.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Nine electronic databases were searched, restricted by date (2011-2018) and language (English). Eligibility included: 1) randomized controlled trials (RCT), controlled clinical trials (CCT), or controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies; 2) interventions implementing research into child health practice; and 3) outcomes were measured at the healthcare professional/process, patient, or economic level.

SAMPLE

Health care professionals working in child health settings.

RESULTS

48 studies (38 RCT, 7 CBA, 3 CCT) were included. Studies employed single (n = 34) and multiple (n = 14) interventions. The methodological quality of studies was moderate (n = 18), strong (n = 16) and weak (n = 14). Studies showing significant, positive effects included (n = 9) RCTs, (n = 3) CBAs and (n = 2) CCTs. These studies employed (n = 11) single KT interventions and (n = 3) multiple KT interventions. Interventions included educational (n = 6), reminders (n = 3), computerized decision supports (n = 2), multidisciplinary teams (n = 2) and financial and educational interventions combined (n = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Effective KT strategies used by health care professionals in child health settings were found to be online education curriculums and computerized decision supports or reminders.

IMPLICATIONS

This review update serves as an up-to-date 'state of the science' on KT strategies used in pediatric health professionals' clinical practice, assessed by the most rigorous research designs.

Insights on the effectiveness of reward schemes from 10-year longitudinal case studies in 2 Italian regions

BACKGROUND

Pay for performance (P4P) programs have been widely analysed in literature, and the results regarding their impact on performance are mixed. Moreover, in the real-life setting, reward schemes are designed combining multiple elements altogether, yet, it is not clear what happens when they are applied using different combinations.

OBJECTIVES

To provide insights on how P4P programs are influenced by 5 key elements: whom, what, how, how many targets, and how much to reward.

METHODS

A qualitative longitudinal analysis of 10 years of P4P reward schemes adopted by the regional administrations of Tuscany and Lombardy (Italy) was conducted. The effects of the P4P features on performance are discussed considering both overall and specific indicators.

RESULTS

Both regions applied financial reward schemes for General Managers by linking the variable pay to performance. While Tuscany maintained a relatively stable financial incentive design and governance tools, Lombardy changed some elements of the design and introduced, in 2012, a P4P program aimed to reward the providers. The main differences between the 2 cases regard the number of targets (how many), the type (what), and the method applied to set targets (how).

CONCLUSION

Considering the overall performance obtained by the 2 regions, it seems that whom, how, and how much to reward are not relevant in the success of P4P programs; instead, the number (how many) and the type (what) of targets set may influence the performance improvement processes driven by financial reward schemes.

Physician Perceptions of Performance Feedback in a Quality Improvement Activity

Physician performance and peer comparison feedback can affect physician care quality and patient outcomes. This study aimed to understand family physician perspectives of the value of performance feedback in quality improvement (QI) activities. This study analyzed American Board of Family Medicine open-ended survey data collected between 2004 and 2014 from physicians who completed a QI module that provided pre- and post-QI project individual performance data and peer comparisons. Physicians made 3480 comments in response to a question about this performance feedback, which were generally positive in nature (86%). Main themes that emerged were importance of accurate feedback data, enhanced detail in the content of feedback, and ability to customize peer comparison groups to compare performance to peers with similar patient populations or practice characteristics. Meaningful and tailored performance feedback may be an important tool for physicians to improve their care quality and should be considered an integral part of QI project design.

Characterization and effectiveness of pay-for-performance in ophthalmology: a systematic review

Background

To identify, characterize and compare existing pay-for-performance approaches and their impact on the quality of care and efficiency in ophthalmology.

Methods

A systematic evidence-based review was conducted. English, French and German written literature published between 2000 and 2015 were searched in the following databases: Medline (via PubMed), NCBI web site, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, Econlit and the Cochrane Library. Empirical as well as descriptive articles were included. Controlled clinical trials, meta-analyses, randomized controlled studies as well as observational studies were included as empirical articles. Systematic characterization of identified pay-for-performance approaches (P4P approaches) was conducted according to the “Model for Implementing and Monitoring Incentives for Quality” (MIMIQ). Methodological quality of empirical articles was assessed according to the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists.

Results

Overall, 13 relevant articles were included. Eleven articles were descriptive and two articles included empirical analyses. Based on these articles, four different pay-for-performance approaches implemented in the United States were identified. With regard to quality and incentive elements, systematic comparison showed numerous differences between P4P approaches. Empirical studies showed isolated cost or quality effects, while a simultaneous examination of these effects was missing.

Conclusion

Research results show that experiences with pay-for-performance approaches in ophthalmology are limited. Identified approaches differ with regard to quality and incentive elements restricting comparability. Two empirical studies are insufficient to draw strong conclusions about the effectiveness and efficiency of these approaches.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2333-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Impact of a Pay-for-Performance Program on Central Line-Associated Blood Stream Infections in Pennsylvania

Healthcare associated infections have significantly contributed to the rising cost of hospital care in the United States. The implementation of pay-for-performance (P4P) programs has been one approach to improve quality at a reduced cost. We quantify the impact of Highmark's Quality Blue (QB) hospital P4P program on central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI) in Pennsylvania. The impact of years of participation in QB on CLABSI is also evaluated. Data from 149 Pennsylvania hospitals on CLABSI from 2008-2013 are used. Negative binomial regression and fixed effects panel regression are performed. Hospitals participating in QB have 0.727 times the CLABSI as those hospitals that do not participate. Hospitals participating for four or more years have on average 3.13 fewer CLABSI per year compared to those participating for less than four years. Highmark's P4P program has shown improved outcomes with regards to CLABSI, but further research is needed to determine if QB is cost effective.

Payment reform in the patient-centered medical home: Enabling and sustaining integrated behavioral health care

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is a promising framework for the redesign of primary care and more recently specialty care. As defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the PCMH framework has 5 attributes: comprehensive care, patient-centered care, coordinated care, accessible services, and quality and safety. Evidence increasingly demonstrates that for the PCMH to best achieve the Triple Aim (improved outcomes, decreased cost, and enhanced patient experience), treatment for behavioral health (including mental health, substance use, and life stressors) must be integrated as a central tenet. However, challenges to implementing the PCMH framework are compounded for real-world practitioners because payment reform rarely happens concurrently. Nowhere is this more evident than in attempts to integrate behavioral health clinicians into primary care. As behavioral health clinicians find opportunities to work in integrated settings, a comprehensive understanding of payment models is integral to the dialogue. This article describes alternatives to the traditional fee for service (FFS) model, including modified FFS, pay for performance, bundled payments, and global payments (i.e., capitation). We suggest that global payment structures provide the best fit to enable and sustain integrated behavioral health clinicians in ways that align with the Triple Aim. Finally, we present recommendations that offer specific, actionable steps to achieve payment reform, complement PCMH, and support integration efforts through policy. (PsycINFO Database Record

Payment methods for outpatient care facilities

BACKGROUND

Outpatient care facilities provide a variety of basic healthcare services to individuals who do not require hospitalisation or institutionalisation, and are usually the patient's first contact. The provision of outpatient care contributes to immediate and large gains in health status, and a large portion of total health expenditure goes to outpatient healthcare services. Payment method is one of the most important incentive methods applied by purchasers to guide the performance of outpatient care providers.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of different payment methods on the performance of outpatient care facilities and to analyse the differences in impact of payment methods in different settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2016, Issue 3, part of the Cochrane Library (searched 8 March 2016); MEDLINE, OvidSP (searched 8 March 2016); Embase, OvidSP (searched 24 April 2014); PubMed (NCBI) (searched 8 March 2016); Dissertations and Theses Database, ProQuest (searched 8 March 2016); Conference Proceedings Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) (searched 8 March 2016); IDEAS (searched 8 March 2016); EconLit, ProQuest (searched 8 March 2016); POPLINE, K4Health (searched 8 March 2016); China National Knowledge Infrastructure (searched 8 March 2016); Chinese Medicine Premier (searched 8 March 2016); OpenGrey (searched 8 March 2016); ClinicalTrials.gov, US National Institutes of Health (NIH) (searched 8 March 2016); World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (searched 8 March 2016); and the website of the World Bank (searched 8 March 2016).In addition, we searched the reference lists of included studies and carried out a citation search for the included studies via ISI Web of Science to find other potentially relevant studies. We also contacted authors of the main included studies regarding any further published or unpublished work.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, and repeated measures studies that compared different payment methods for outpatient health facilities. We defined outpatient care facilities in this review as facilities that provide health services to individuals who do not require hospitalisation or institutionalisation. We only included methods used to transfer funds from the purchaser of healthcare services to health facilities (including groups of individual professionals). These include global budgets, line-item budgets, capitation, fee-for-service (fixed and unconstrained), pay for performance, and mixed payment. The primary outcomes were service provision outcomes, patient outcomes, healthcare provider outcomes, costs for providers, and any adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We conducted a structured synthesis. We first categorised the comparisons and outcomes and then described the effects of different types of payment methods on different categories of outcomes. We used a fixed-effect model for meta-analysis within a study if a study included more than one indicator in the same category of outcomes. We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis across studies. If the data for meta-analysis were not available in some studies, we calculated the median and interquartile range. We reported the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the relative change for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 studies from Afghanistan, Burundi, China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Tanzania, the United Kingdom, and the United States of health facilities providing primary health care and mental health care. There were three kinds of payment comparisons. 1) Pay for performance (P4P) combined with some existing payment method (capitation or different kinds of input-based payment) compared to the existing payment methodWe included 18 studies in this comparison, however we did not include five studies in the effects analysis due to high risk of bias. From the 13 studies, we found that the extra P4P incentives probably slightly improved the health professionals' use of some tests and treatments (adjusted RR median = 1.095, range 1.01 to 1.17; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably led to little or no difference in adherence to quality assurance criteria (adjusted percentage change median = -1.345%, range -8.49% to 5.8%; moderate-certainty evidence). We also found that P4P incentives may have led to little or no difference in patients' utilisation of health services (adjusted RR median = 1.01, range 0.96 to 1.15; low-certainty evidence) and may have led to little or no difference in the control of blood pressure or cholesterol (adjusted RR = 1.01, range 0.98 to 1.04; low-certainty evidence). 2) Capitation combined with P4P compared to fee-for-service (FFS)One study found that compared with FFS, a capitated budget combined with payment based on providers' performance on antibiotic prescriptions and patient satisfaction probably slightly reduced antibiotic prescriptions in primary health facilities (adjusted RR 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 0.96; moderate-certainty evidence). 3) Capitation compared to FFSTwo studies compared capitation to FFS in mental health centres in the United States. Based on these studies, the effects of capitation compared to FFS on the utilisation and costs of services were uncertain (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review found that if policymakers intend to apply P4P incentives to pay health facilities providing outpatient services, this intervention will probably lead to a slight improvement in health professionals' use of tests or treatments, particularly for chronic diseases. However, it may lead to little or no improvement in patients' utilisation of health services or health outcomes. When considering using P4P to improve the performance of health facilities, policymakers should carefully consider each component of their P4P design, including the choice of performance measures, the performance target, payment frequency, if there will be additional funding, whether the payment level is sufficient to change the behaviours of health providers, and whether the payment to facilities will be allocated to individual professionals. Unfortunately, the studies included in this review did not help to inform those considerations.Well-designed comparisons of different payment methods for outpatient health facilities in low- and middle-income countries and studies directly comparing different designs (e.g. different payment levels) of the same payment method (e.g. P4P or FFS) are needed.

Incentives and disincentives for treating of depression and anxiety in Ontario Family Health Teams: protocol for a grounded theory study

INTRODUCTION

There is strong consensus that prevention and management of common mental disorders (CMDs) should occur in primary care and evidence suggests that treatment of CMDs in these settings can be effective. New interprofessional team-based models of primary care have emerged that are intended to address problems of quality and access to mental health services, yet many people continue to struggle to access care for CMDs in these settings. Insufficient attention directed towards the incentives and disincentives that influence care for CMDs in primary care, and especially in interprofessional team-based settings, may have resulted in missed opportunities to improve care quality and control healthcare costs. Our research is driven by the hypothesis that a stronger understanding of the full range of incentives and disincentives at play and their relationships with performance and other contextual factors will help stakeholders identify the critical levers of change needed to enhance prevention and management of CMDs in interprofessional primary care contexts. Participant recruitment began in May 2016.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

An explanatory qualitative design, based on a constructivist grounded theory methodology, will be used. Our study will be conducted in the Canadian province of Ontario, a province that features a widely implemented interprofessional team-based model of primary care. Semistructured interviews will be conducted with a diverse range of healthcare professionals and stakeholders that can help us understand how various incentives and disincentives influence the provision of evidence-based collaborative care for CMDs. A final sample size of 100 is anticipated. The protocol was peer reviewed by experts who were nominated by the funding organisation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The model we generate will shed light on the incentives and disincentives that are and should be in place to support high-quality CMD care and help stimulate more targeted, coordinated stakeholder responses to improving primary mental healthcare quality.

Will Financial Incentives Stimulate Quality Improvement? Reactions From Frontline Physicians

Pay-for-performance is being applied at the physician level to stimulate improvements in quality of care and cost efficiency; however, little is known about how physicians will respond. We interviewed physicians exposed to a financial incentive program in California to identify possible barriers to the successful application of financial incentives by exploring physicians' opinions of and experiences with pay-for-performance programs. Reasons physicians cited for quality deficiencies included insurance coverage limitations and lack of patient compliance, time, and proper physician oversight. Physicians believe that they play a significant role and have a moderate to high degree of control over quality of care and that it is important to self-monitor. Physicians expressed the need for accurate and timely data, peer comparisons, and more patient time, staff support, and consultations with colleagues to successfully monitor and deliver quality care. Many support increased pay for delivering high-quality care but question measurement accuracy, bonus payment financing, and health plan involvement.

Development of the Quality Data Collection Tool for Prospective Quality Assessment and Reporting in Palliative Care

BACKGROUND

Assessing and reporting the quality of care provided are increasingly important in palliative care, but we currently lack practical, efficient approaches for collection and reporting.

OBJECTIVE

In response, the Global Palliative Care Quality Alliance ("Alliance") sought to create a Quality Data Collection Tool for Palliative Care (QDACT-PC).

METHODS

We collaboratively and iteratively developed QDACT-PC, an electronic, point-of-care quality monitoring system for palliative care that supports prospective quality assessment and reporting in any clinical setting. QDACT-PC is the web-based data collection and reporting interface. Quality measures selected to be used in QDACT-PC were derived from a systematic review summarizing all published palliative care quality measure sets; Alliance clinical providers prioritized measures to be included in QDACT-PC to ensure maximal clinical relevance. Data elements and variables required to ascertain conformance to all selected quality measures were included in the QDACT-PC data dictionary. Whenever possible, variables collected in QDACT-PC align with validated surveys and/or nationally recognized common data elements. QDACT-PC data elements and software programmed business rules inform real-time assessments of conformance to selected quality measures. Data are deposited into a centralized registry for future analyses.

RESULTS

QDACT-PC can be used to report on >80% of all published palliative care quality measures and 100% of high-priority measure.

CONCLUSION

Electronic methods for collecting point-of-care quality monitoring data can be developed using collaborative partnerships between community and academic palliative care providers. Feasibility testing and creation of feedback reports are ongoing.

Strategies for Improving Vaccine Delivery: A Cluster-Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

New emphasis on and requirements for demonstrating health care quality have increased the need for evidence-based methods to disseminate practice guidelines. With regard to impact on pediatric immunization coverage, we aimed to compare a financial incentive program (pay-for-performance [P4P]) and a virtual quality improvement technical support (QITS) learning collaborative.

METHODS

This single-blinded (to outcomes assessor), cluster-randomized trial was conducted among unaffiliated pediatric practices across the United States from June 2013 to June 2014. Practices received either the P4P or QITS intervention. All practices received a Vaccinator Toolkit. P4P practices participated in a tiered financial incentives program for immunization coverage improvement. QITS practices participated in a virtual learning collaborative. Primary outcome was percentage of all needed vaccines received (PANVR). We also assessed immunization up-to-date (UTD) status.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed from 3,147 patient records from 32 practices. Practices in the study arms reported similar QI activities (∼6 to 7 activities). We found no difference in PANVR between P4P and QITS (mean ± SE, 90.7% ± 1.1% vs 86.1% ± 1.3%, P = 0.46). Likewise, there was no difference in odds of being UTD between study arms (adjusted odds ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.52, P = .93). In within-group analysis, patients in both arms experienced nonsignificant increases in PANVR. Similarly, the change in adjusted odds of UTD over time was modest and nonsignificant for P4P but reached significance in the QITS arm (adjusted odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.60, P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Participation in either a financial incentives program or a virtual learning collaborative led to self-reported improvements in immunization practices but minimal change in objectively measured immunization coverage.

Systematic Review of Knowledge Translation Strategies to Promote Research Uptake in Child Health Settings

Strategies to assist evidence-based decision-making for healthcare professionals are crucial to ensure high quality patient care and outcomes. The goal of this systematic review was to identify and synthesize the evidence on knowledge translation interventions aimed at putting explicit research evidence into child health practice.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of thirteen electronic databases was conducted, restricted by date (1985-2011) and language (English). Articles were included if: 1) studies were randomized controlled trials (RCT), controlled clinical trials (CCT), or controlled before-and-after (CBA) studies; 2) target population was child health professionals; 3) interventions implemented research in child health practice; and 4) outcomes were measured at the professional/process, patient, or economic level. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Study data were aggregated and analyzed using evidence tables.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (13 RCT, 2 CCT, 6 CBA) were included. The studies employed single (n=9) and multiple interventions (n=12). The methodological quality of the included studies was largely moderate (n=8) or weak (n=11). Of the studies with moderate to strong methodological quality ratings, three demonstrated consistent, positive effect(s) on the primary outcome(s); effective knowledge translation interventions were two single, non-educational interventions and one multiple, educational intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

This multidisciplinary systematic review in child health setting identified effective knowledge translation strategies assessed by the most rigorous research designs. Given the overall poor quality of the research literature, specific recommendations were made to improve knowledge translation efforts in child health.

Medicaid Pay for Performance Programs and Childhood Immunization Status

INTRODUCTION

Although pay for performance (P4P) programs are being increasingly used by state Medicaid programs to provide incentives for managed care plans to provide high-quality care, no national study has examined the effects of these plans on commonly targeted outcomes such as childhood immunization rates.

METHODS

Information from the 1999-2011 National Immunization Survey combined with information on state Medicaid P4P programs from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was used to study the effect of Medicaid P4P programs on the immunization status of children aged 19-35 months. Difference-in-difference-in-difference models were used to study whether adoption of Medicaid P4P programs was associated with higher immunization rates among Medicaid-eligible children relative to non-Medicaid eligible children within states that adopted Medicaid P4P programs compared with states that did not. Linear probability models were used in all estimations, and models controlled for demographic factors.

RESULTS

The study found no overall effect of Medicaid P4P on the chance that children aged 19-35 months had completed the 4:3:1:3:3:1 vaccination series. However, there was a 4 percentage point increase in the chance that a child 19-23 months had completed the series.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides some evidence that Medicaid P4P programs may be helpful in improving childhood vaccination rates. Further study of the effects on other targeted outcomes as well as the effects of different P4P program designs may increase understanding of the potential role of these programs in improving the quality of health care.

Pay for Performance in Medicaid: Evidence from Three Natural Experiments

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of pay for performance in Medicaid on the quality and utilization of care.

DATA SOURCES

Medicaid claims and encounter data in three intervention states (Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and Alabama) and three comparison states.

STUDY DESIGN

Difference-in-difference analysis with propensity score-matched comparison group. Primary outcomes of interest were Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS)-like process measures of quality, utilization by service category, and ambulatory care-sensitive admissions and emergency department visits.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In Pennsylvania, there was a statistically significant reduction of 88 ambulatory visits per 1,000 enrollee months compared with Florida. In Minnesota, there was a significant decrease of 7.2 hospital admissions per thousand enrollee months compared with Wisconsin. In Alabama, where incentives were not paid out until the end of a 2-year waiver period, there was a decline of 1.6 hospital admissions per thousand member months, and an increase of 59 ambulatory visits per 1,000 enrollees compared with Georgia. No significant quality improvements in intervention relative to control states.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings are mixed, with no measurable quality improvements across the three states, but reductions in hospital admissions in two programs. As states move to value-based payment for patient-centered medical homes and Accountable Care Organizations, lessons learned from these pioneering states should inform program design.

Protocol: Adaptive Implementation of Effective Programs Trial (ADEPT): cluster randomized SMART trial comparing a standard versus enhanced implementation strategy to improve outcomes of a mood disorders program

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of psychosocial evidence-based practices (EBPs), treatment and outcomes for persons with mental disorders remain suboptimal. Replicating Effective Programs (REP), an effective implementation strategy, still resulted in less than half of sites using an EBP. The primary aim of this cluster randomized trial is to determine, among sites not initially responding to REP, the effect of adaptive implementation strategies that begin with an External Facilitator (EF) or with an External Facilitator plus an Internal Facilitator (IF) on improved EBP use and patient outcomes in 12 months.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study employs a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design to build an adaptive implementation strategy. The EBP to be implemented is life goals (LG) for patients with mood disorders across 80 community-based outpatient clinics (N = 1,600 patients) from different U.S. regions. Sites not initially responding to REP (defined as < 50% patients receiving ≥ 3 EBP sessions) will be randomized to receive additional support from an EF or both EF/IF. Additionally, sites randomized to EF and still not responsive will be randomized to continue with EF alone or to receive EF/IF. The EF provides technical expertise in adapting LG in routine practice, whereas the on-site IF has direct reporting relationships to site leadership to support LG use in routine practice. The primary outcome is mental health-related quality of life; secondary outcomes include receipt of LG sessions, mood symptoms, implementation costs, and organizational change.

DISCUSSION

This study design will determine whether an off-site EF alone versus the addition of an on-site IF improves EBP uptake and patient outcomes among sites that do not respond initially to REP. It will also examine the value of delaying the provision of EF/IF for sites that continue to not respond despite EF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02151331.

Physician response to pay-for-performance: evidence from a natural experiment

This study exploits a natural experiment in the province of Ontario, Canada, to identify the impact of pay-for-performance (P4P) incentives on the provision of targeted primary care services and whether physicians' responses differ by age, size of patient population, and baseline compliance level. We use administrative data that cover the full population of Ontario and nearly all the services provided by primary care physicians. We employ a difference-in-differences approach that controls for selection on observables and selection on unobservables that may cause estimation bias. We implement a set of robustness checks to control for confounding from other contemporaneous interventions of the primary care reform in Ontario. The results indicate that responses were modest and that physicians responded to the financial incentives for some services but not others. The results provide a cautionary message regarding the effectiveness of employing P4P to increase the quality of health care.

Impacts of pay for performance on the quality of primary care

Increasingly, financial incentives are being used in health care as a result of increasing demand for health care coupled with fiscal pressures. Financial incentive schemes are one approach by which the system may incentivize providers of health care to improve productivity and/or adapt to better quality provision. Pay for performance (P4P) is an example of a financial incentive which seeks to link providers’ payments to some measure of performance. This paper provides a discussion of the theoretical underpinnings of P4P, gives an overview of the health P4P evidence base, and provide a detailed case study of a particularly large scheme from the English National Health Service. Lessons are then drawn from the evidence base. Overall, we find that the evidence for the effectiveness of P4P for improving quality of care in primary care is mixed. This is to some extent due to the fact that the P4P schemes used in primary care are also mixed. There are many different schemes that incentivize different aspects of care in different ways and in different settings, making evaluation problematic. The Quality and Outcomes Framework in the United Kingdom is the largest example of P4P in primary care. Evidence suggests incentivized quality initially improved following the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework, but this was short-lived. If P4P in primary care is to have a long-term future, the question about scheme effectiveness (perhaps incorporating the identification and assessment of potential risk factors) needs to be answered robustly. This would require that new schemes be designed from the onset to support their evaluation: control and treatment groups, coupled with before and after data.

A Qualitative Evaluation of the Performance-based Supplementary Payment System in Turkey

The Ministry of Health of Turkey introduced performance-based supplementary payment (PBSP) system in 2004. The importance of feedbacks from healthcare providers regarding the implementation of alternative health policies has been recognized in the literature. This study reports the perceptions of physicians about the PBSP system in Turkey. A qualitative analysis has been conducted in two hospitals in the Western province of Turkey, Balıkesir. Analysis results suggest that physicians have limited awareness about the pay for performance system. They agree that the PBSP system has not achieved the objectives of enhancing productivity, efficiency and quality of care. The major contributing factors to the limited success of the system have been identified as increased workload, stress and competition among the physicians. Thus revisions have been suggested for the proper implementation of the programme, which include the determination of a maximum number of medical examinations.

The ABCs of incentive-based treatment in health care: a behavior analytic framework to inform research and practice

Behavior plays an important role in health promotion. Exercise, smoking cessation, medication adherence, and other healthy behavior can help prevent, or even treat, some diseases. Consequently, interventions that promote healthy behavior have become increasingly common in health care settings. Many of these interventions award incentives contingent upon preventive health-related behavior. Incentive-based interventions vary considerably along several dimensions, including who is targeted in the intervention, which behavior is targeted, and what type of incentive is used. More research on the quantitative and qualitative features of many of these variables is still needed to inform treatment. However, extensive literature on basic and applied behavior analytic research is currently available to help guide the study and practice of incentive-based treatment in health care. In this integrated review, we discuss how behavior analytic research and theory can help treatment providers design and implement incentive-based interventions that promote healthy behavior.

Two-year impact of the alternative quality contract on pediatric health care quality and spending

OBJECTIVE

To examine the 2-year effect of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts' global budget arrangement, the Alternative Quality Contract (AQC), on pediatric quality and spending for children with special health care needs (CSHCN) and non-CSHCN.

METHODS

Using a difference-in-differences approach, we compared quality and spending trends for 126,975 unique 0- to 21-year-olds receiving care from AQC groups with 415,331 propensity-matched patients receiving care from non-AQC groups; 23% of enrollees were CSHCN. We compared quality and spending pre (2006-2008) and post (2009-2010) AQC implementation, adjusting analyses for age, gender, health risk score, and secular trends. Pediatric outcome measures included 4 preventive and 2 acute care measures tied to pay-for-performance (P4P), 3 asthma and 2 attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder quality measures not tied to P4P, and average total annual medical spending.

RESULTS

During the first 2 years of the AQC, pediatric care quality tied to P4P increased by +1.8% for CSHCN (P < .001) and +1.2% for non-CSHCN (P < .001) for AQC versus non-AQC groups; quality measures not tied to P4P showed no significant changes. Average total annual medical spending was ~5 times greater for CSHCN than non-CSHCN; there was no significant impact of the AQC on spending trends for children.

CONCLUSIONS

During the first 2 years of the contract, the AQC had a small but significant positive effect on pediatric preventive care quality tied to P4P; this effect was greater for CSHCN than non-CSHCN. However, it did not significantly influence (positively or negatively) CSHCN measures not tied to P4P or affect per capita spending for either group.

The role of Medicaid managed care interventions in Chlamydia screening by physicians

BACKGROUND

Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) guidelines call for annual screening of all sexually active young females. In previous studies, Medicaid health maintenance organizations (HMOs) did not consistently recommend CT and other sexually transmitted disease guidelines, but physicians with HMO practices were more likely to comply with guidelines than those without HMO practices. This study examines the relationship between HMO interventions and physician adherence to annual (CT) screening guidelines for sexually active young (ages 15-25) females.

METHODS

Medicaid HMOs (N = 17) of California were surveyed regarding their interventions to increase physician adherence with national CT screening guidelines in 2002. Primary care physicians (N = 941) who contracted with these HMOs were also surveyed on their frequency (always/usually) of CT screening. Data were analyzed using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

HMO-reported recommendations for CT screening and other interventions were associated with significantly higher odds of frequent CT screening by contracted physicians in unadjusted models. HMO recommendations to screen young females increased the odds of frequent CT screening, but other interventions were no longer significantly associated after controlling for physician characteristics. Physicians also had higher odds of reporting frequent CT screening if they had received training in the past, had received feedback from their contracted HMOs, or reported having access to national CT screening guidelines. Physician gender, specialty, years of clinical experience, and other factors were also significantly associated with the odds of frequency of CT screening.

DISCUSSION

Improving physician adherence with CT screening guidelines requires a refinement of current approaches with targeted interventions that are tailored to the characteristics of physicians. In addition, interventions are more likely to be effective if provided in formats that are perceived and acknowledged by physicians.

Key issues in the design of pay for performance programs

Pay for performance (P4P) is increasingly being used to stimulate healthcare providers to improve their performance. However, evidence on P4P effectiveness remains inconclusive. Flaws in program design may have contributed to this limited success. Based on a synthesis of relevant theoretical and empirical literature, this paper discusses key issues in P4P-program design. The analysis reveals that designing a fair and effective program is a complex undertaking. The following tentative conclusions are made: (1) performance is ideally defined broadly, provided that the set of measures remains comprehensible, (2) concerns that P4P encourages "selection" and "teaching to the test" should not be dismissed, (3) sophisticated risk adjustment is important, especially in outcome and resource use measures, (4) involving providers in program design is vital, (5) on balance, group incentives are preferred over individual incentives, (6) whether to use rewards or penalties is context-dependent, (7) payouts should be frequent and low-powered, (8) absolute targets are generally preferred over relative targets, (9) multiple targets are preferred over single targets, and (10) P4P should be a permanent component of provider compensation and is ideally "decoupled" form base payments. However, the design of P4P programs should be tailored to the specific setting of implementation, and empirical research is needed to confirm the conclusions.

Physician-targeted financial incentives and primary care physicians' self-reported ability to provide high-quality primary care

OBJECTIVE

High-quality primary care is envisaged as the centerpiece of the emerging health care delivery system under the Affordable Care Act. Reengineering the US health care system into a primary care-driven model will require widespread, rapid changes in the management and organization of primary care physicians (PCPs). Financial incentives to influence physician behavior have been attempted with various approaches, without empirical evidence of their effectiveness in improving care quality. This study examines the above research question adjusting for the patient-centeredness of the practice climate, a major contextual factor affecting PCPs' ability to provide high-quality care.

METHODS

Secondary data on a sample of salaried PCPs (n = 1733) from the nation-wide Community Tracking Study Physician Survey 2004-2005 were subject to generalized multinomial logit modeling to examine associations between financial incentives and PCPs' self-reported ability to provide quality care.

RESULTS

After adjusting for patient-centered medical home (PCMH)-consistent practice environment, financial incentive aligned with care quality/care content is positively associated with PCPs' ability to provide high-quality care. An encouraging finding was that financial incentives aligned with clinic productivity/profitability do not to impede high-quality care in a PCMH practice environment.

CONCLUSION

Financial incentives targeted to care quality or content indicators may facilitate rapid transformation of the health system to a primary care-driven system. The study provides empirical evidence of the utility of practically deployable financial incentives to facilitate high-quality primary care.

The Joint Commission Children's Asthma Care quality measures and asthma readmissions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Joint Commission introduced 3 Children's Asthma Care (CAC 1-3) measures to improve the quality of pediatric inpatient asthma care. Validity of the commission's measures has not yet been demonstrated. The objectives of this quality improvement study were to examine changes in provider compliance with CAC 1-3 and associated asthma hospitalization outcomes after full implementation of an asthma care process model (CPM).

METHODS

The study included children aged 2 to 17 years who were admitted to a tertiary care children's hospital for acute asthma between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2010. The study was divided into 3 periods: preimplementation (January 1, 2005-December 31, 2007), implementation (January 1, 2008-March 31, 2009), and postimplementation (April 1, 2009-December 31, 2010) periods. Changes in provider compliance with CAC 1-3 and associated changes in hospitalization outcomes (length of stay, costs, PICU transfer, deaths, and asthma readmissions within 6 months) were measured. Logistic regression was used to control for age, gender, race, insurance type, and time.

RESULTS

A total of 1865 children were included. Compliance with quality measures before and after the CPM implementation was as follows: 99% versus 100%, CAC-1; 100% versus 100%, CAC-2; and 0% versus 87%, CAC-3 (P < .01). Increased compliance with CAC-3 was associated with a sustained decrease in readmissions from an average of 17% to 12% (P = .01) postimplementation. No change in other outcomes was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the asthma CPM was associated with improved compliance with CAC-3 and with a delayed, yet significant and sustained decrease in hospital asthma readmission rates, validating CAC-3 as a quality measure. Due to high baseline compliance, CAC-1 and CAC-2 are of questionable value as quality measures.

Promise and perils of guidelines in quality cancer care

In an era of guideline propagation, this case helps raise the question, Does quality cancer care now require that we always follow guidelines exactly, or do some circumstances still require a more individualized approach?

Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

BACKGROUND

Audit and feedback is widely used as a strategy to improve professional practice either on its own or as a component of multifaceted quality improvement interventions. This is based on the belief that healthcare professionals are prompted to modify their practice when given performance feedback showing that their clinical practice is inconsistent with a desirable target. Despite its prevalence as a quality improvement strategy, there remains uncertainty regarding both the effectiveness of audit and feedback in improving healthcare practice and the characteristics of audit and feedback that lead to greater impact.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of audit and feedback on the practice of healthcare professionals and patient outcomes and to examine factors that may explain variation in the effectiveness of audit and feedback.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2010, Issue 4, part of The Cochrane Library. www.thecochranelibrary.com, including the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (searched 10 December 2010); MEDLINE, Ovid (1950 to November Week 3 2010) (searched 09 December 2010); EMBASE, Ovid (1980 to 2010 Week 48) (searched 09 December 2010); CINAHL, Ebsco (1981 to present) (searched 10 December 2010); Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index, ISI Web of Science (1975 to present) (searched 12-15 September 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of audit and feedback (defined as a summary of clinical performance over a specified period of time) that reported objectively measured health professional practice or patient outcomes. In the case of multifaceted interventions, only trials in which audit and feedback was considered the core, essential aspect of at least one intervention arm were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All data were abstracted by two independent review authors. For the primary outcome(s) in each study, we calculated the median absolute risk difference (RD) (adjusted for baseline performance) of compliance with desired practice compliance for dichotomous outcomes and the median percent change relative to the control group for continuous outcomes. Across studies the median effect size was weighted by number of health professionals involved in each study. We investigated the following factors as possible explanations for the variation in the effectiveness of interventions across comparisons: format of feedback, source of feedback, frequency of feedback, instructions for improvement, direction of change required, baseline performance, profession of recipient, and risk of bias within the trial itself. We also conducted exploratory analyses to assess the role of context and the targeted clinical behaviour. Quantitative (meta-regression), visual, and qualitative analyses were undertaken to examine variation in effect size related to these factors.

MAIN RESULTS

We included and analysed 140 studies for this review. In the main analyses, a total of 108 comparisons from 70 studies compared any intervention in which audit and feedback was a core, essential component to usual care and evaluated effects on professional practice. After excluding studies at high risk of bias, there were 82 comparisons from 49 studies featuring dichotomous outcomes, and the weighted median adjusted RD was a 4.3% (interquartile range (IQR) 0.5% to 16%) absolute increase in healthcare professionals' compliance with desired practice. Across 26 comparisons from 21 studies with continuous outcomes, the weighted median adjusted percent change relative to control was 1.3% (IQR = 1.3% to 28.9%). For patient outcomes, the weighted median RD was -0.4% (IQR -1.3% to 1.6%) for 12 comparisons from six studies reporting dichotomous outcomes and the weighted median percentage change was 17% (IQR 1.5% to 17%) for eight comparisons from five studies reporting continuous outcomes. Multivariable meta-regression indicated that feedback may be more effective when baseline performance is low, the source is a supervisor or colleague, it is provided more than once, it is delivered in both verbal and written formats, and when it includes both explicit targets and an action plan. In addition, the effect size varied based on the clinical behaviour targeted by the intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Audit and feedback generally leads to small but potentially important improvements in professional practice. The effectiveness of audit and feedback seems to depend on baseline performance and how the feedback is provided. Future studies of audit and feedback should directly compare different ways of providing feedback.

Designing an effective pay-for-performance system in the Korean National Health Insurance

The challenge facing the Korean National Health Insurance includes what to spend money on in order to elevate the 'value for money.' This article reviewed the changing issues associated with quality of care in the Korean health insurance system and envisioned a picture of an effective pay-for-performance (P4P) system in Korea taking into consideration quality of care and P4P systems in other countries. A review was made of existing systematic reviews and a recent Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development survey. An effective P4P in Korea was envisioned as containing three features: measures, basis for reward, and reward. The first priority is to develop proper measures for both efficiency and quality. For further improvement of quality indicators, an electronic system for patient history records should be built in the near future. A change in the level or the relative ranking seems more desirable than using absolute level alone for incentives. To stimulate medium- and small-scale hospitals to join the program in the next phase, it is suggested that the scope of application be expanded and the level of incentives adjusted. High-quality indicators of clinical care quality should be mapped out by combining information from medical claims and information from patient registries.

The use of three strategies to improve quality of care at a national level

BACKGROUND

Improving the quality of care is essential and a priority for patients, surgeons, and healthcare providers. Strategies to improve quality have been proposed at the national level either through accreditation standards or through national payment schemes; however, their effectiveness in improving quality is controversial.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purpose of this review was to address three questions: (1) does pay-for-performance improve the quality of care; (2) do surgical safety checklists improve the quality of surgical care; and (3) do practice guidelines improve the quality of care? These three strategies were chosen because there has been some research assessing their effectiveness in improving quality, and implementation had been attempted on a large scale such as entire countries.

METHODS

We performed a literature review from 1950 forward using Medline to identify Level I and II studies. We evaluated the three strategies and their effects on processes and outcomes of care. When possible, we examined strategy implementation, patients, and systems, including provider characteristics, which may affect the relationship between intervention and outcomes with a focus on factors that may have influenced effect size.

RESULTS

Pay-for-performance improved the process and to a lesser extent the outcome of care. Surgical checklists reduced morbidity and mortality. Explicit practice guidelines influenced the process and to a lesser extent the outcome of care. Although not definitively showed, clinician involvement during development of intervention and outcomes, with explicit strategies for communication and implementation, appears to increase the likelihood of positive results.

CONCLUSION

Although the cost-effectiveness of these three strategies is unknown, quality of care could be enhanced by implementing pay-for-performance, surgical safety checklists, and explicit practice guidelines. However, this review identified that the effectiveness of these strategies is highly context-specific.

Accuracy and usefulness of the HEDIS childhood immunization measures

OBJECTIVE

With the use of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) immunization recommendations as the gold standard, our objectives were to measure the accuracy ("is this child up-to-date on immunizations?") and usefulness ("is this child due for catch-up immunizations?") of the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) childhood immunization measures.

METHODS

For children aged 24 to 35 months from the 2009 National Immunization Survey, we assessed the accuracy and usefulness of the HEDIS childhood immunization measures for 6 individual immunizations and a composite.

RESULTS

A total of 12 096 children met all inclusion criteria and composed the study sample. The HEDIS measures had >90% accuracy when compared with the CDC gold standard for each of the 6 immunizations (range, 94.3%-99.7%) and the composite (93.8%). The HEDIS measure was least accurate for hepatitis B and pneumococcal conjugate immunizations. The proportion of children for which the HEDIS measure yielded a nonuseful result (ie, an incorrect answer to the question, "is this child due for catch-up immunization?") ranged from 0.33% (varicella) to 5.96% (pneumococcal conjugate). The most important predictor of HEDIS measure accuracy and usefulness was the CDC-recommended number of immunizations due at age 2 years; children with zero or all immunizations due were the most likely to be correctly classified.

CONCLUSIONS

HEDIS childhood immunization measures are, on the whole, accurate and useful. Certain immunizations (eg, hepatitis B, pneumococcal conjugate) and children (eg, those with a single overdue immunization), however, are more prone to HEDIS misclassification.

Physician practice responses to financial incentive programs: exploring the concept of implementation mechanisms

PURPOSE

To develop a framework for studying financial incentive program implementation mechanisms, the means by which physician practices and physicians translate incentive program goals into their specific office setting. Understanding how new financial incentives fit with the structure of physician practices and individual providers' work may shed some insight on the variable effects of physician incentives documented in numerous reviews and meta-analyses.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Reviewing select articles on pay-for-performance evaluations to identify and characterize the presence of implementation mechanisms for designing, communicating, implementing, and maintaining financial incentive programs as well as recognizing participants' success and effects on patient care.

FINDINGS

Although uncommonly included in evaluations, evidence from 26 articles reveals financial incentive program sponsors and participants utilized a variety of strategies to facilitate communication about program goals and intentions, to provide feedback about participants' progress, and to assist-practices in providing recommended services. Despite diversity in programs' geographic locations, clinical targets, scope, and market context, sponsors and participants deployed common strategies. While these methods largely pertained to communication between program sponsors and participants and the provision of information about performance through reports and registries, they also included other activities such as efforts to engage patients and ways to change staff roles.

LIMITATIONS

This review covers a limited body of research to develop a conceptual framework for future research; it did not exhaustively search for new articles and cannot definitively link particular implementation mechanisms to outcomes.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Our results underscore the effects implementation mechanisms may have on how practices incorporate new programs into existing systems of care which implicates both the potential rewards from small changes as well as the resources which may be required to obtain buy-in and support.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

We identify gaps in previous research regarding actual changes occurring in physician practices in response to physician incentive programs. We offer suggestions for future evaluation by proposing a framework for understanding implementation. Our model will assist future scholars in translating site-specific experiences with incentive programs into more broadly relevant guidance for practices by facilitating comparisons across seemingly disparate programs.

An overview of reviews evaluating the effectiveness of financial incentives in changing healthcare professional behaviours and patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

There is considerable interest in the effectiveness of financial incentives in the delivery of health care. Incentives may be used in an attempt to increase the use of evidence-based treatments among healthcare professionals or to stimulate health professionals to change their clinical behaviour with respect to preventive, diagnostic and treatment decisions, or both. Financial incentives are an extrinsic source of motivation and exist when an individual can expect a monetary transfer which is made conditional on acting in a particular way. Since there are numerous reviews performed within the healthcare area describing the effects of various types of financial incentives, it is important to summarise the effectiveness of these in an overview to discern which are most effective in changing health professionals' behaviour and patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct an overview of systematic reviews that evaluates the impact of financial incentives on healthcare professional behaviour and patient outcomes.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) (The Cochrane Library); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE); TRIP; MEDLINE; EMBASE; Science Citation Index; Social Science Citation Index; NHS EED; HEED; EconLit; and Program in Policy Decision-Making (PPd) (from their inception dates up to January 2010). We searched the reference lists of all included reviews and carried out a citation search of those papers which cited studies included in the review. We included both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), interrupted time series (ITSs) and controlled before and after studies (CBAs) that evaluated the effects of financial incentives on professional practice and patient outcomes, and that reported numerical results of the included individual studies. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of each review according to the AMSTAR criteria. We included systematic reviews of studies evaluating the effectiveness of any type of financial incentive. We grouped financial incentives into five groups: payment for working for a specified time period; payment for each service, episode or visit; payment for providing care for a patient or specific population; payment for providing a pre-specified level or providing a change in activity or quality of care; and mixed or other systems. We summarised data using vote counting.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four reviews reporting on 32 studies. Two reviews scored 7 on the AMSTAR criteria (moderate, score 5 to 7, quality) and two scored 9 (high, score 8 to 11, quality). The reported quality of the included studies was, by a variety of methods, low to moderate. Payment for working for a specified time period was generally ineffective, improving 3/11 outcomes from one study reported in one review. Payment for each service, episode or visit was generally effective, improving 7/10 outcomes from five studies reported in three reviews; payment for providing care for a patient or specific population was generally effective, improving 48/69 outcomes from 13 studies reported in two reviews; payment for providing a pre-specified level or providing a change in activity or quality of care was generally effective, improving 17/20 reported outcomes from 10 studies reported in two reviews; and mixed and other systems were of mixed effectiveness, improving 20/31 reported outcomes from seven studies reported in three reviews. When looking at the effect of financial incentives overall across categories of outcomes, they were of mixed effectiveness on consultation or visit rates (improving 10/17 outcomes from three studies in two reviews); generally effective in improving processes of care (improving 41/57 outcomes from 19 studies in three reviews); generally effective in improving referrals and admissions (improving 11/16 outcomes from 11 studies in four reviews); generally ineffective in improving compliance with guidelines outcomes (improving 5/17 outcomes from five studies in two reviews); and generally effective in improving prescribing costs outcomes (improving 28/34 outcomes from 10 studies in one review).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives may be effective in changing healthcare professional practice. The evidence has serious methodological limitations and is also very limited in its completeness and generalisability. We found no evidence from reviews that examined the effect of financial incentives on patient outcomes.

[The life cycle of general practitioners' professional motivations: the case of prevention]

BACKGROUND

The analysis of "professional motivations", mainly through the possible crowding-out effects between extrinsic and intrinsic motivations, has become an issue of great concern in the economic literature. This paper aims at applying this topic to the healthcare professions where the proper scaling up of pay-for-performance (P4P) policies by public authorities is at stake.

METHODS

We used a panel of 528 self-employed general practitioners in the "Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur" region in France to provide an interpersonal statistical decomposition between extrinsic and intrinsic motivations with regard to preventive actions. Then, we applied a Tobit model in order to specify the main explicative variables of the share of intrinsic motivations entering into physicians' total motivations.

RESULTS

The relative share of intrinsic motivations was quite high among physicians paid with fixed fees. We found a significant effect of age on intrinsic motivations describing a U-shaped curve which can be interpreted as being the result of a "life cycle of medical motivations" or a generational effect.

CONCLUSION

The cross-sectional nature of the data does not allow us to draw any conclusions concerning the predominance of the generational effect or the "life cycle effect" on the evolution of the relative share of physician's intrinsic motivations. Nevertheless, the U-shaped relation between intrinsic motivations and age questions the suitability of using uniformly P4P mechanisms. The generations or age groups of self-employed physicians who seem to be less responsive to extrinsic motivations are more likely to favour the introduction of other types of payment schemes (capitation or salary systems) or regulation tools such as clinical practice guidelines.

Performance feedback: an exploratory study to examine the acceptability and impact for interdisciplinary primary care teams

Background

This mixed methods study was designed to explore the acceptability and impact of feedback of team performance data to primary care interdisciplinary teams.

Methods

Seven interdisciplinary teams were offered a one-hour, facilitated performance feedback session presenting data from a comprehensive, previously-conducted evaluation, selecting highlights such as performance on chronic disease management, access, patient satisfaction and team function.

Results

Several recurrent themes emerged from participants' surveys and two rounds of interviews within three months of the feedback session. Team performance measurement and feedback was welcomed across teams and disciplines. This feedback could build the team, the culture, and the capacity for quality improvement. However, existing performance indicators do not equally reflect the role of different disciplines within an interdisciplinary team. Finally, the effect of team performance feedback on intentions to improve performance was hindered by a poor understanding of how the team could use the data.

Conclusions

The findings further our understanding of how performance feedback may engage interdisciplinary team members in improving the quality of primary care and the unique challenges specific to these settings. There is a need to develop a shared sense of responsibility and agenda for quality improvement. Therefore, more efforts to develop flexible and interactive performance-reporting structures (that better reflect contributions from all team members) in which teams could specify the information and audience may assist in promoting quality improvement.

Disparities in asthma medication dispensing patterns: the case of pediatric asthma in Puerto Rico

BACKGROUND

Disparities exist in asthma medication dispensing between children with public insurance and those with private insurance under a Managed Care Medicaid system in Puerto Rico.

OBJECTIVES

Island-wide medical claims data were used to examine the extent to which differences between the private and public health care sectors affect medication dispensing and health care utilization among asthmatic children.

METHODS

Children 3-18 years old with at least one service claim [outpatient, hospitalization, or emergency department (ED) visit] for asthma or reactive airway disease from 2005 to 2006 were selected. Chi-square analyses compared medication dispensing and health care utilization between the public and private sectors. Negative binomial regression identified factors associated with the mean dispensing rate of prescriptions for anti-inflammatory controller medication (CM).

RESULTS

Private insurance families (n = 28,088) were dispensed significantly more CM (48.3% vs. 12.0%) and quick relief medication (47.4% vs. 44.6%) than public insurance families (n = 13,220). The dispensing of inhaled corticosteroids (24.4% vs. 6.7%) and leukotriene modifiers and cromolyn (31.4% vs. 5.7%) was dramatically higher in the private sector. In contrast, emergency room use was significantly higher among public insurance children (51.7% vs. 13.8%). Multivariate analysis showed that age, number of β-agonists, and type of insurance was associated with CM dispensing; private insurance showed the greatest effect.

CONCLUSION

Asthmatic Puerto Rican children enrolled in public insurance were significantly less likely to be dispensed CM than children with private insurance; suggesting that under-treatment of public insured children may substantially contribute to increased asthma morbidity in this population as evidenced by significantly higher rates of ED visits.

CAPSULE SUMMARY

A disparity exists in asthma medication dispensing between children with public insurance compared with those with private insurance under a Managed Care Medicaid system in Puerto Rico. If asthma disparities in medication dispensing are to be reduced, then a better understanding of the complex ways in which multiple variables related to the health care system policies, socioeconomic factors, family and provider interactions, as well as the relative weight that each one contributes to the observed inequalities is needed.

Association between Medicaid reimbursement and child influenza vaccination rates

OBJECTIVE

We examined associations between influenza vaccination rates and Medicaid reimbursement rates for vaccine administration among poor children who were eligible for Medicaid (<100% of the federal poverty level in all states).

METHODS

We analyzed 3 consecutive National Immunization Surveys (NISs) to assess influenza vaccination rates among nationally representative children 6 to 23 months of age during the 2005-2006 (unweighted N = 12 885), 2006-2007 (unweighted N = 9238), and 2007-2008 (unweighted N = 11 785) influenza seasons (weighted N = 3.3-4.0 million per season). We categorized children into 3 income levels (poor, near-poor, or nonpoor). We performed analyses with full influenza vaccination as the dependent variable and state Medicaid reimbursement rates (continuous covariate ranging from $2 to $17.86 per vaccination) and terms with income levels as key covariates.

RESULTS

In total, 21.0%, 21.3%, and 28.9% of all US children and 11.7%, 11.6%, and 18.8% of poor children were fully vaccinated in the 2006, 2007, and 2008 NISs, respectively. Multivariate analyses of all 3 seasons found positive significant (all P < .05) associations between state-level Medicaid reimbursement and influenza vaccination rates among poor children. A $10 increase, from $8 per influenza vaccination (the US average) to $18 (the highest state reimbursement), in the Medicaid reimbursement rate was associated with 6.0-, 9.2-, and 6.4-percentage point increases in full vaccination rates among poor children in the 2006, 2007, and 2008 NIS analyses, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Medicaid reimbursement rates are strongly associated with influenza vaccination rates.

Challenges and opportunities in measuring the quality of mental health care

The purpose of our paper is to delineate the barriers to mental health quality measurement, and to identify strategies to enhance the development and use of quality measures by mental health providers, programs, payers, and other stakeholders in the service of improving outcomes for people with mental health and substance use disorders. Key reasons for the lag in mental health performance measurement include lack of sufficient evidence regarding appropriate mental health care, poorly defined quality measures, limited descriptions of mental health services from existing clinical data, and lack of linked electronic health information. We discuss strategies for overcoming these barriers that are being implemented in several countries, including the need to have quality improvement as part of standard clinical training curricula, refinement of technologies to promote adequate data capture of mental health services, use of incentives to promote provider accountability for improving care, and the need for mental health researchers to improve the evidence base for mental health treatment.

Barriers to Prescribing Controller Anti Inflammatory Medication among Puerto Rican Asthmatic Children with Public Insurance: Results of National Survey of Pediatricians

BACKGROUND: There are substantial disparities in dispensing patterns of long term control medications for asthma among children in Puerto Rico with public insurance as compared to those with private insurance. Public health insurance policy in Puerto Rico includes the cost of medications in the capitation paid to the primary care physicians and clinics. METHODS: Survey questionnaires were mailed to all pediatricians enrolled in the Puerto Rico College of Physicians (n=798) in addition to some pediatricians not enrolled in the College (n=25) for a total of 823 pediatricians. Of these, 722 were eligible pediatricians with 458 responding to the survey for a response rate of 63.4%. RESULTS: Most of the respondents expressed being moderately to very familiar with the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) guidelines (71.7%) and with the NAEPP recommendations for controller asthma medication use (73.5%). Inadequate capitation to cover asthma medication (86.2%) and lack of adequate health insurance coverage of the patient (83.2%) however, were the most frequent barriers reported by pediatricians for prescribing controller asthma medication to children with public health insurance. The most frequent strategies used to provide controller asthma medication to these children were prescription of oral medications (59.5%) and giving away samples (44.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Current public health insurance policy in Puerto Rico creates a disincentive to the appropriate prescription of long term control medication for children with asthma. To improve the quality of asthma care of children in Puerto Rico, revision of this public health insurance policy is necessary.

Systematic review: Effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care

BACKGROUND

Pay-for-performance (P4P) is one of the primary tools used to support healthcare delivery reform. Substantial heterogeneity exists in the development and implementation of P4P in health care and its effects. This paper summarizes evidence, obtained from studies published between January 1990 and July 2009, concerning P4P effects, as well as evidence on the impact of design choices and contextual mediators on these effects. Effect domains include clinical effectiveness, access and equity, coordination and continuity, patient-centeredness, and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

The systematic review made use of electronic database searching, reference screening, forward citation tracking and expert consultation. The following databases were searched: Cochrane Library, EconLit, Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, and Web of Science. Studies that evaluate P4P effects in primary care or acute hospital care medicine were included. Papers concerning other target groups or settings, having no empirical evaluation design or not complying with the P4P definition were excluded. According to study design nine validated quality appraisal tools and reporting statements were applied. Data were extracted and summarized into evidence tables independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-eight evaluation studies provide a large body of evidence -to be interpreted with caution- concerning the effects of P4P on clinical effectiveness and equity of care. However, less evidence on the impact on coordination, continuity, patient-centeredness and cost-effectiveness was found. P4P effects can be judged to be encouraging or disappointing, depending on the primary mission of the P4P program: supporting minimal quality standards and/or boosting quality improvement. Moreover, the effects of P4P interventions varied according to design choices and characteristics of the context in which it was introduced.Future P4P programs should (1) select and define P4P targets on the basis of baseline room for improvement, (2) make use of process and (intermediary) outcome indicators as target measures, (3) involve stakeholders and communicate information about the programs thoroughly and directly, (4) implement a uniform P4P design across payers, (5) focus on both quality improvement and achievement, and (6) distribute incentives to the individual and/or team level.

CONCLUSIONS

P4P programs result in the full spectrum of possible effects for specific targets, from absent or negligible to strongly beneficial. Based on the evidence the review has provided further indications on how effect findings are likely to relate to P4P design choices and context. The provided best practice hypotheses should be tested in future research.

Does the frequency of pay-for-performance payment matter?--Experience from a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of incentive payment frequency on quality measures in a physician-specific pay-for-performance (P4P) experiment.

STUDY SETTING

A multispecialty physician group practice.

STUDY DESIGN

In 2007, all primary care physicians (n=179) were randomized into two study arms differing by the frequency of incentive payment, either four quarterly bonus checks or a single year-end bonus (maximum of U.S.$5,000/year for both arms).

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

Data were extracted from electronic health records. Quality measure scores between the two arms over four quarters were compared.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

There was no difference between the two arms in average quality measure score or in total bonus amount earned.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians' responses to a P4P program with a small maximum bonus do not differ by frequency of bonus payment.