Literature DB >> 22492897

Medicare's flagship test of pay-for-performance did not spur more rapid quality improvement among low-performing hospitals.

Andrew M Ryan1, Jan Blustein, Lawrence P Casalino.   

Abstract

Medicare's flagship hospital pay-for-performance program, the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration, began in 2003 but changed its incentive design in late 2006. The goals were to encourage greater quality improvement, particularly among lower-performing hospitals. However, we found no evidence that the change achieved these goals. Although the program changes were intended to provide strong incentives for improvement to the lowest-performing hospitals, we found that in practice the new incentive design resulted in the strongest incentives for hospitals that had already achieved quality performance ratings just above the median for the entire group of participating hospitals. Yet during the course of the program, these hospitals improved no more than others. Our findings raise questions about whether pay-for-performance strategies that reward improvement can generate greater improvement among lower performing providers. They also cast some doubt on the extent to which hospitals respond to the specific structure of economic incentives in pay-for-performance programs.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22492897     DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0626

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)        ISSN: 0278-2715            Impact factor:   6.301


  20 in total

1.  Higher Incentive Payments in Medicare Advantage's Pay-for-Performance Program Did Not Improve Quality But Did Increase Plan Offerings.

Authors:  Timothy J Layton; Andrew M Ryan
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-11-09       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  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

3.  The effects of a schizophrenia pay-for-performance program on patient outcomes in Taiwan.

Authors:  Tsung-Tai Chen; Jing-Jung Yang; Ya-Seng Arthur Hsueh; Vinchi Wang
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Shared savings models for ACOs-incentivizing primary care physicians.

Authors:  Mona Siddiqui; Scott A Berkowitz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 5.  The importance of clinical pathways and protocols in pediatric nephrology.

Authors:  Cherry Mammen; Douglas G Matsell; Kevin V Lemley
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2013-08-18       Impact factor: 3.714

6.  Changes in Hospital Quality Associated with Hospital Value-Based Purchasing.

Authors:  Andrew M Ryan; Sam Krinsky; Kristin A Maurer; Justin B Dimick
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Why We Should Not Be Indifferent to Specification Choices for Difference-in-Differences.

Authors:  Andrew M Ryan; James F Burgess; Justin B Dimick
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 8.  Current State of Value-Based Purchasing Programs.

Authors:  Tingyin T Chee; Andrew M Ryan; Jason H Wasfy; William B Borden
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  The early effects of Medicare's mandatory hospital pay-for-performance program.

Authors:  Andrew M Ryan; James F Burgess; Michael F Pesko; William B Borden; Justin B Dimick
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 3.402

10.  Does pay-for-performance improve surgical outcomes? An evaluation of phase 2 of the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration.

Authors:  Terry Shih; Lauren H Nicholas; Jyothi R Thumma; John D Birkmeyer; Justin B Dimick
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 12.969

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.