Literature DB >> 26249639

What can the past of pay-for-performance tell us about the future of Value-Based Purchasing in Medicare?

Andrew M Ryan1, Cheryl L Damberg2.   

Abstract

The Medicare program has implemented pay-for-performance (P4P), or Value-Based Purchasing, for inpatient care and for Medicare Advantage plans, and plans to implement a program for physicians in 2015. In this paper, we review evidence on the effectiveness of P4P and identify design criteria deemed to be best practice in P4P. We then assess the extent to which Medicare's existing and planned Value-Based Purchasing programs align with these best practices. Of the seven identified best practices in P4P program design, the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing program is strongly aligned with two of the best practices, moderately aligned with three, weakly aligned with one, and has unclear alignment with one best practice. The Physician Value-Based Purchasing Modifier is strongly aligned with two of the best practices, moderately aligned with one, weakly aligned with three, and has unclear alignment with one of the best practices. The Medicare Advantage Quality Bonus Program is strongly aligned with four of the best practices, moderately aligned with two, and weakly aligned with one of the best practices. We identify enduring gaps in P4P literature as it relates to Medicare's plans for Value-Based Purchasing and discuss important issues in the future of these implementations in Medicare.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Medicare; Pay-for-performance; Payment; Value-based-purchasing

Year:  2013        PMID: 26249639     DOI: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2013.04.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Healthc (Amst)        ISSN: 2213-0764


  8 in total

1.  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

2.  Effects of Changes in Diabetes Pay-for-Performance Incentive Designs on Patient Risk Selection.

Authors:  Hui-Min Hsieh; Shu-Ling Tsai; Lih-Wen Mau; Herng-Chia Chiu
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Innovative Payment Mechanisms in Maryland Hospitals: An Empirical Analysis of Readmissions under Total Patient Revenue.

Authors:  Karoline Mortensen; Chad Perman; Jie Chen
Journal:  Healthc (Amst)       Date:  2014-09-01

4.  Real-time Feedback in Pay-for-Performance: Does More Information Lead to Improvement?

Authors:  Amelia M Bond; Kevin G Volpp; Ezekiel J Emanuel; Kristen Caldarella; Amanda Hodlofski; Lee Sacks; Pankaj Patel; Kara Sokol; Salvatore Vittore; Don Calgano; Carrie Nelson; Kevin Weng; Andrea Troxel; Amol Navathe
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Physician practice participation in accountable care organizations: the emergence of the unicorn.

Authors:  Stephen M Shortell; Sean R McClellan; Patricia P Ramsay; Lawrence P Casalino; Andrew M Ryan; Kennon R Copeland
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-03-15       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  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

7.  Longitudinal participation in delivery and payment reform programs among US Primary Care Organizations.

Authors:  Julia Adler-Milstein; Ariel Linden; Steven Bernstein; John Hollingsworth; Andrew Ryan
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-02-28       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 8.  Characterization and effectiveness of pay-for-performance in ophthalmology: a systematic review.

Authors:  Tim Herbst; Martin Emmert
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 2.655

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.