Literature DB >> 16378529

Do the incentive payments in the new NHS contract for primary care reflect likely population health gains?

Robert Fleetcroft1, Richard Cookson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The new contract for primary care in the UK offers fee-for-service (FFS) payments for a wide range of activities in a quality outcomes framework (QOF), with payments designed to reflect likely workload. This study aims to explore the link between these financial incentives and the likely population health gains.
METHODS: The study examines a subset of eight preventive interventions covering 38 of the 81 clinical indicators in the quality framework. The maximum payment for each service was calculated and compared with the likely population health gain in terms of lives saved per 100,000 population based on evidence from McColl et al. (1998).
RESULTS: Maximum payments for the eight interventions examined make up 57% of the total maximum payment for all clinical interventions in the (QOF). There appears to be no relationship between pay and health gain across these eight interventions. Two of the eight interventions (warfarin in atrial fibrillation and statins in primary prevention) receive no incentive.
CONCLUSIONS: Payments in the new contract do not reflect likely population health gain. There is a danger that clinical activity may be skewed towards high-workload activities that are only marginally effective, to the detriment of more cost-effective activities. If improving population health is the primary goal of the NHS, then FFS incentives should be designed to reflect likely health gain rather than likely workload.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16378529     DOI: 10.1258/135581906775094316

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy        ISSN: 1355-8196


  20 in total

1.  The relationship between prescribing expenditure and quality in primary care: an observational study.

Authors:  Robert Fleetcroft; Richard Cookson
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Is doctors' self interest undermining the National Health Service.

Authors:  Alan Maynard
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-02-03

3.  Measuring performance and missing the point?

Authors:  Iona Heath; Julia Hippisley-Cox; Liam Smeeth
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-11-24

4.  Preventive health care in elderly people needs rethinking.

Authors:  Dee Mangin; Kieran Sweeney; Iona Heath
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-08-11

5.  Effect of the new contract on GPs' working lives and perceptions of quality of care: a longitudinal survey.

Authors:  Diane Whalley; Hugh Gravelle; Bonnie Sibbald
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  The new general practice contract and reform of primary care in the United kingdom.

Authors:  Stephen Peckham
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2007-05

7.  Why are statin prescribing guidelines for primary prevention not always followed in primary care?

Authors:  Yasmeen Hassan; John Ford; Nicholas Steel; Joanna Sheldon; Robert Fleetcroft
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 5.386

8.  RISQy business (Relationships, Incentives, Supports, and Quality): evolution of the British Columbia Model of Primary Care (patient-centered medical home).

Authors:  Dan MacCarthy; Marcus J Hollander
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2014

9.  Interpretive medicine: Supporting generalism in a changing primary care world.

Authors:  Joanne Reeve
Journal:  Occas Pap R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  2010-01

Review 10.  Systematic review: Effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care.

Authors:  Pieter Van Herck; Delphine De Smedt; Lieven Annemans; Roy Remmen; Meredith B Rosenthal; Walter Sermeus
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-08-23       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.