PURPOSE: Pay-for-performance (P4P) programs have been implemented in many health care markets in the United States. The purpose of this study was to survey faculty members and trainees regarding familiarity with the P4P model and their interest in further education. METHODS: An eight-question survey designed to explore faculty member and trainee awareness of and attitudes toward P4P was distributed. Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: One hundred four of 144 questionnaires distributed to faculty members (50 of 70) and trainees (54 of 74) were returned. Sixty-one percent of trainees stated that they had never heard of the P4P model. Seventeen percent of trainees and 26% of attending radiologists were aware that P4P programs have already been instituted. Although 74% of trainees agreed that P4P will influence their reimbursement in the future, only 42% of attending radiologists agreed. A minority of trainees and attending radiologists (35%) felt that P4P improves the quality of care, whereas 42% were neutral. A majority were interested in further education. CONCLUSION: Faculty members and trainees in diagnostic radiology in a university-based program were unfamiliar with the P4P model of reimbursement and were interested in learning more. Additional investigation is needed to ascertain whether this knowledge gap is widespread. This could influence future education about P4P on a national level.
PURPOSE: Pay-for-performance (P4P) programs have been implemented in many health care markets in the United States. The purpose of this study was to survey faculty members and trainees regarding familiarity with the P4P model and their interest in further education. METHODS: An eight-question survey designed to explore faculty member and trainee awareness of and attitudes toward P4P was distributed. Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: One hundred four of 144 questionnaires distributed to faculty members (50 of 70) and trainees (54 of 74) were returned. Sixty-one percent of trainees stated that they had never heard of the P4P model. Seventeen percent of trainees and 26% of attending radiologists were aware that P4P programs have already been instituted. Although 74% of trainees agreed that P4P will influence their reimbursement in the future, only 42% of attending radiologists agreed. A minority of trainees and attending radiologists (35%) felt that P4P improves the quality of care, whereas 42% were neutral. A majority were interested in further education. CONCLUSION: Faculty members and trainees in diagnostic radiology in a university-based program were unfamiliar with the P4P model of reimbursement and were interested in learning more. Additional investigation is needed to ascertain whether this knowledge gap is widespread. This could influence future education about P4P on a national level.