Literature DB >> 21366120

Pay-for-performance: a survey of specialty providers in urogynecology.

Elisabeth A Erekson1, Vivian W Sung, Melissa A Clark.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop and implement a web-based survey to collect information on the reported knowledge, attitudes and practice impact of pay-for-performance (P4P) among providers in the specialty of urogynecology. STUDY
DESIGN: All members of the American Urogynecologic Society were invited to participate in a web-based survey. The questionnaire focused on reported knowledge, attitudes and practice impact of P4P.
RESULTS: Complete responses were obtained from 212 members for a survey response rate of 17.6%. A minority of participants (9.0%) reported having "a lot of knowledge" of the P4P reimbursement model. Fifty-five (25.9%) participants reported that the hospital or healthcare system where they worked had some involvement with P4P reimbursement.
CONCLUSION: A minority of participants reported having a lot of knowledge of P4P, even though current involvement with some type of P4P reimbursement was reported by >25% of participants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21366120      PMCID: PMC3631540     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Reprod Med        ISSN: 0024-7758            Impact factor:   0.142


  13 in total

1.  Quality improvement in gynecologic surgery: the new frontier.

Authors:  Karl C Podratz
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  General internists' views on pay-for-performance and public reporting of quality scores: a national survey.

Authors:  Lawrence P Casalino; G Caleb Alexander; Lei Jin; R Tamara Konetzka
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.301

Review 3.  Pay for performance in orthopaedic surgery.

Authors:  Read G Pierce; Kevin J Bozic; David S Bradford
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Pay-for-performance: will the latest payment trend improve care?

Authors:  Meredith B Rosenthal; R Adams Dudley
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-02-21       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 5.  Methodologies for improving response rates in surveys of physicians: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jonathan B VanGeest; Timothy P Johnson; Verna L Welch
Journal:  Eval Health Prof       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 2.651

6.  Pay for performance: survey of diagnostic radiology faculty and trainees.

Authors:  Rebecca L Seidel; Deborah A Baumgarten
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 7.  Pay for performance: an overview of the literature.

Authors:  Stuart E Greene; David B Nash
Journal:  Am J Med Qual       Date:  2008-11-04       Impact factor: 1.852

Review 8.  Pay for performance: rationale and potential implications for urology.

Authors:  Chris M Gonzalez; David Penson; Beth Kosiak; James Dupree; J Quentin Clemens
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2007-06-11       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Patient safety in obstetrics and gynecology: an agenda for the future.

Authors:  Mark D Pearlman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Pay for performance: what the urogynecologist should know.

Authors:  Elisabeth A Erekson; Vivian W Sung; Deborah L Myers
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2008-07-16
View more
  2 in total

1.  Physicians’ lack of awareness of how they are paid: implications for new models of reimbursement.

Authors:  Kira L Ryskina; Tara F Bishop
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-10-14       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 2.  Lessons from healthcare providers' attitudes toward pay-for-performance: what should purchasers consider in designing and implementing a successful program?

Authors:  Jin Yong Lee; Sang-Il Lee; Min-Woo Jo
Journal:  J Prev Med Public Health       Date:  2012-05-31
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.