Literature DB >> 22417137

The effect of Phase 2 of the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration on incentive payments to hospitals caring for disadvantaged patients.

Andrew M Ryan1, Jan Blustein, Tim Doran, Marilyn D Michelow, Lawrence P Casalino.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Medicare and Premier Inc. Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration (HQID), a hospital-based pay-for-performance program, changed its incentive design from one rewarding only high performance (Phase 1) to another rewarding high performance, moderate performance, and improvement (Phase 2). We tested whether this design change reduced the gap in incentive payments among hospitals treating patients across the gradient of socioeconomic disadvantage. DATA: To estimate incentive payments in both phases, we used data from the Premier Inc. website and from Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files. We used data from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Impact File to identify hospital characteristics. STUDY
DESIGN: Hospitals were divided into quartiles based on their Disproportionate Share Index (DSH), from lowest disadvantage (Quartile 1) to highest disadvantage (Quartile 4). In both phases of the HQID, we tested for differences across the DSH quartiles for three outcomes: (1) receipt of any incentive payments; (2) total incentive payments; and (3) incentive payments per discharge. For each of the study outcomes, we performed a hospital-level difference-in-differences analysis to test whether the gap between Quartile 1 and the other quartiles decreased from Phase 1 to Phase 2. PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: In Phase 1, there were significant gaps across the DSH quartiles for the receipt of any payment and for payment per discharge. In Phase 2, the gap was not significant for the receipt of any payment, but it remained significant for payment per discharge. For the receipt of any incentive payment, difference-in-difference estimates showed significant reductions in the gap between Quartile 1 and the other quartiles (Quartile 2, 17.5 percentage points [p < .05]; Quartile 3, 18.1 percentage points [p < .01]; Quartile 4, 28.3 percentage points [p < .01]). For payments per discharge, the gap was also significantly reduced between Quartile 1 and the other quartiles (Quartile 2, $14.92 per discharge [p < .10]; Quartile 3, $17.34 per discharge [p < .05]; Quartile 4, $21.31 per discharge [p < .01]). There were no significant reductions in the gap for total payments.
CONCLUSIONS: The design change in the HQID reduced the disparity in the receipt of any incentive payment and for incentive payments per discharge between hospitals caring for the most and least socioeconomically disadvantaged patient populations. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22417137      PMCID: PMC3401392          DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2012.01393.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.402


  15 in total

1.  Too much ado about two-part models and transformation? Comparing methods of modeling Medicare expenditures.

Authors:  Melinda Beeuwkes Buntin; Alan M Zaslavsky
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Does pay-for-performance steal from the poor and give to the rich?

Authors:  Rachel M Werner
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Can incentives to improve quality reduce disparities?

Authors:  Karen Ho; Ernest Moy; Carolyn M Clancy
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  The effect of the MassHealth hospital pay-for-performance program on quality.

Authors:  Andrew M Ryan; Jan Blustein
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-01-06       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Will pay-for-performance and quality reporting affect health care disparities?

Authors:  Lawrence P Casalino; Arthur Elster; Andy Eisenberg; Evelyn Lewis; John Montgomery; Diana Ramos
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2007-04-10       Impact factor: 6.301

6.  Do hospitals provide lower-quality care to minorities than to whites?

Authors:  Darrell J Gaskin; Christine S Spencer; Patrick Richard; Gerard F Anderson; Neil R Powe; Thomas A Laveist
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2008 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.301

Review 7.  Pay for performance in the hospital setting: what is the state of the evidence?

Authors:  Ateev Mehrotra; Cheryl L Damberg; Melony E S Sorbero; Stephanie S Teleki
Journal:  Am J Med Qual       Date:  2008-12-10       Impact factor: 1.852

8.  The effect of financial incentives on hospitals that serve poor patients.

Authors:  Ashish K Jha; E John Orav; Arnold M Epstein
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Hospital performance, the local economy, and the local workforce: findings from a US National Longitudinal Study.

Authors:  Jan Blustein; William B Borden; Melissa Valentine
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  High quality care and ethical pay-for-performance: a Society of General Internal Medicine policy analysis.

Authors:  J Frank Wharam; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Neil J Farber; Christine Sinsky; Lisa Rucker; Kimberly J Rask; M Kathleen Figaro; Clarence Braddock; Michael J Barry; Daniel P Sulmasy
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-03-18       Impact factor: 5.128

View more
  12 in total

1.  Measuring Success in Health Care Value-Based Purchasing Programs: Findings from an Environmental Scan, Literature Review, and Expert Panel Discussions.

Authors:  Cheryl L Damberg; Melony E Sorbero; Susan L Lovejoy; Grant R Martsolf; Laura Raaen; Daniel Mandel
Journal:  Rand Health Q       Date:  2014-12-30

2.  Moderating Effects of Patient Characteristics on the Impact of Financial Incentives.

Authors:  Meredith B Rosenthal; Andrea B Troxel; Kevin G Volpp; Walter F Stewart; Thomas D Sequist; James B Jones; AnneMarie G Hirsch; Karen Hoffer; Jingsan Zhu; Wenli Wang; Amanda Hodlofski; Darra Finnerty; Jack J Huang; David A Asch
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2017-05-08       Impact factor: 3.929

Review 3.  Pay-for-Performance: Disappointing Results or Masked Heterogeneity?

Authors:  Adam A Markovitz; Andrew M Ryan
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 3.929

4.  Black patients more likely than whites to undergo surgery at low-quality hospitals in segregated regions.

Authors:  Justin Dimick; Joel Ruhter; Mary Vaughan Sarrazin; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 6.301

5.  Does winning a pay-for-performance bonus improve subsequent quality performance? Evidence from the Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration.

Authors:  Andrew Ryan; Matthew Sutton; Tim Doran
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  Pay for performance for hospitals.

Authors:  Tim Mathes; Dawid Pieper; Johannes Morche; Stephanie Polus; Thomas Jaschinski; Michaela Eikermann
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-07-05

7.  Local population characteristics and hemoglobin A1c testing rates among diabetic medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Laura C Yasaitis; Thomas Bubolz; Jonathan S Skinner; Amitabh Chandra
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Performance Of Safety-Net Hospitals In Year 1 Of The Comprehensive Care For Joint Replacement Model.

Authors:  Caroline P Thirukumaran; Laurent G Glance; Xueya Cai; Rishi Balkissoon; Addisu Mesfin; Yue Li
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 6.301

9.  Design and effects of outcome-based payment models in healthcare: a systematic review.

Authors:  F P Vlaanderen; M A Tanke; B R Bloem; M J Faber; F Eijkenaar; F T Schut; P P T Jeurissen
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2018-07-05

10.  Does payment for performance increase performance inequalities across health providers? A case study of Tanzania.

Authors:  Peter Binyaruka; Bjarne Robberstad; Gaute Torsvik; Josephine Borghi
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 3.344

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.