Impact of pay for performance on behavior of primary care physicians and patient outcomes

Investigating the effect of service feedback and physician popularity on physician demand in the virtual healthcare environment

Purpose

This study examines how service feedback and physician popularity affect physician demand in the context of virtual healthcare environment. Based on the signaling theory, the critical factor of environment uncertainty (i.e. disease risk) and its impact on physician demand is also investigated. Further, the research on the endogeneity of online reviews in healthcare is also examined in the current study.

Design/methodology/approach

A secondary data econometric analysis using 3-wave data sets of 823 physicians obtained from two PRWs (Healthgrades and Vitals) was conducted. The analysis was run using the difference-in-difference method to consider physician and website-specific effects.

Findings

The study's findings indicate that physician popularity has a stronger positive effect on physician demand compared with service feedback. Improving popularity leads to a relative increase in the number of appointments, which in turn enhance physician demand. Further, the impact of physician popularity on physician demand is positively mitigated by the disease risk.

Originality/value

The authors' research contributes to a better understanding of the signaling transmission mechanism in the online healthcare environment. Further, the findings provide practical implications for key stakeholders into how an efficient feedback and popularity mechanism can be built to enhance physician service outcomes in order to maximize the financial efficiency of physicians.

Delivering maternal and childcare at primary healthcare level: The role of PMAQ as a pay for performance strategy in Brazil

Background

Improving access and quality in health care is a pressing issue worldwide and pay for performance (P4P) strategies have emerged as an alternative to enhance structure, process and outcomes in health. In 2011, Brazil adopted its first P4P scheme at national level, the National Programme for Improving Primary Care Access and Quality (PMAQ). The contribution of PMAQ in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals related to maternal and childcare remains under investigated in Brazil.

Objective

To estimate the association of PMAQ with the provision of maternal and childcare in Brazil, controlling for socioeconomic, geographic and family health team characteristics.

Method

We used cross-sectional quantile regression (QR) models for two periods, corresponding to 33,368 Family Health Teams (FHTs) in the first cycle and 39,211 FHTs in the second cycle of PMAQ. FHTs were analysed using data from the Brazilian Ministry of Health (SIAB and CNES) and the Brazilian Institute for Geography and Statistics (IBGE).

Results

The average number of antenatal consultations per month were positively associated with PMAQ participating teams, with larger effect in the lower tail (10^th and 25^th quantiles) of the conditional distribution of the response variable. There was a positive association between PMAQ and the average number of consultations under 2 years old per month in the 10^th and 25^th quantiles, but a negative association in the upper tail (75^th and 90^th quantiles). For the average number of physician consultations for children under 1 year old per month, PMAQ participating teams were positively associated with the response variable in the lower tail, but different from the previous models, there is no clear evidence that the second cycle gives larger coefficients compared with first cycle.

Conclusion

PMAQ has contributed to increase the provision of care to pregnant women and children under 2 years at primary healthcare level. Teams with lower average number of antenatal or child consultations benefited the most by participating in PMAQ, which suggests that PMAQ might motivate worse performing health providers to catch up.

Primary care clinicians' perspectives about quality measurements in safety-net clinics and non-safety-net clinics

BACKGROUND

Quality metrics, pay for performance (P4P), and value-based payments are prominent aspects of the current and future American healthcare system. However, linking clinic payment to clinic quality measures may financially disadvantage safety-net clinics and their patient population because safety-net clinics often have worse quality metric scores than non-safety net clinics. The Minnesota Safety Net Coalition's Quality Measurement Enhancement Project sought to collect data from primary care providers' (PCPs) experiences, which could assist Minnesota policymakers and state agencies as they create a new P4P system. Our research study aims are to identify PCPs' perspectives about 1) quality metrics at safety net clinics and non-safety net clinics, 2) how clinic quality measures affect patients and patient care, and 3) how payment for quality measures may influence healthcare.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews with 14 PCPs (4 individual interviews and 3 focus groups) who had worked at both safety net and non-safety net primary care clinics in Minneapolis-St Paul Minnesota USA metropolitan area. Qualitative analyses identified major themes.

RESULTS

Three themes with sub-themes emerged. Theme #1: Minnesota's current clinic quality scores are influenced more by patients and clinic systems than by clinicians. Theme #2: Collecting data for a set of specific quality measures is not the same as measuring quality healthcare. Subtheme #2.1: Current quality measures are not aligned with how patients and clinicians define quality healthcare. Theme #3: Current quality measures are a product of and embedded in social and structural inequities in the American health care system. Subtheme #3.1: The current inequitable healthcare system should not be reinforced with financial payments. Subtheme #3.2: Health equity requires new metrics and a new healthcare system. Overall, PCPs felt that the current inequitable quality metrics should be replaced by different metrics along with major changes to the healthcare system that could produce greater health equity.

CONCLUSION

Aligning payment with the current quality metrics could perpetuate and exacerbate social inequities and health disparities. Policymakers should consider PCPs' perspectives and create a quality-payment framework that does not disadvantage patients who are affected by social and structural inequities as well as the clinics and providers who serve them.

Funding models and medical dominance in interdisciplinary primary care teams: qualitative evidence from three Canadian provinces

BACKGROUND

Primary care in Canada is the first point of entry for patients needing specialized services, the fundamental source of care for those living with chronic illness, and the main supplier of preventive services. Increased pressures on the system lead to changes such as an increased reliance on interdisciplinary teams, which are advocated to have numerous advantages. The functioning of teams largely depends on inter-professional relationships that can be supported or strained by the financial arrangements within teams. We assess which types of financial environments perpetuate and which reduce the challenge of medical dominance.

METHODS

Using qualitative interview data from 19 interdisciplinary teams/networks in three Canadian provinces, as well as related policy documents, we develop a typology of financial environments along two dimensions, financial hierarchy and multiplicity of funding sources. A financial hierarchy is created when the incomes of some providers are a function of the incomes of other providers. A multiplicity of funding sources is created when team funding is provided by several funders and a team faces multiple lines of accountability.

RESULTS

We argue that medical dominance is perpetuated with higher degrees of financial hierarchy and higher degrees of multiplicity. We show that the financial environments created in the three provinces have not supported a reduction in medical dominance. The longstanding Community Health Centre model, however, displays the least financial hierarchy and the least multiplicity-an environment least fertile for medical dominance.

CONCLUSIONS

The functioning of interdisciplinary primary care teams can be negatively affected by the unique positioning of the medical profession. The financial environment created for teams is an important consideration in policy development, as it plays an important role in establishing inter-professional relationships. Policies that reduce financial hierarchies and funding multiplicities are optimal in this regard.

Impact of Accountable Care Organizations on Utilization, Care, and Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Since 2010, more than 900 accountable care organizations (ACOs) have formed payment contracts with public and private insurers in the United States; however, there has not been a systematic evaluation of the evidence studying impacts of ACOs on care and outcomes across payer types. This review evaluates the quality of evidence regarding the association of public and private ACOs with health service use, processes, and outcomes of care. The 42 articles identified studied ACO contracts with Medicare ( N = 24 articles), Medicaid ( N = 5), commercial ( N = 11), and all payers ( N = 2). The most consistent associations between ACO implementation and outcomes across payer types were reduced inpatient use, reduced emergency department visits, and improved measures of preventive care and chronic disease management. The seven studies evaluating patient experience or clinical outcomes of care showed no evidence that ACOs worsen outcomes of care; however, the impact on patient care and outcomes should continue to be monitored.

Funding and remuneration of interdisciplinary primary care teams in Canada: a conceptual framework and application

Background

Reliance on interdisciplinary teams in the delivery of primary care is on the rise. Funding bodies strive to design financial environments that support collaboration between providers. At present, the design of financial arrangements has been fragmented and not based on evidence. The root of the problem is a lack of systematic evidence demonstrating the superiority of any particular financial arrangement, or a solid understanding of options. In this study we develop a framework for the conceptualization and analysis of financial arrangements in interdisciplinary primary care teams.

Methods

We use qualitative data from three sources: (i) interviews with 19 primary care decision makers representing 215 clinics in three Canadian provinces, (ii) a research roundtable with 14 primary care decision makers and/or researchers, and (iii) policy documents. Transcripts from interviews and the roundtable were coded thematically and a framework synthesis approach was applied.

Results

Our conceptual framework differentiates between team level funding and provider level remuneration, and characterizes the interplay and consonance between them. Particularly the notions of hierarchy, segregation, and dependence of provider incomes, and the link between funding and team activities are introduced as new clarifying concepts, and their implications explored. The framework is applied to the analysis of collaboration incentives, which appear strongest when provider incomes are interdependent, funding is linked to the team as a whole, and accountability does not have multiple lines. Emergent implementation issues discussed by respondents include: (i) centrality of budget negotiations; (ii) approaches to patient rostering; (iii) unclear funding sources for space and equipment; and (iv) challenges with community engagement. The creation of patient rosters is perceived as a surprisingly contentious issue, and the challenges of funding for space and equipment remain unresolved.

Conclusions

The development and application of a conceptual framework is an important step to the systematic study of the best performing financial models in the context of interdisciplinary primary care. The identification of optimal financial arrangements must be contextualized in terms of feasibility and the implementation environment. In general, financial hierarchy, both overt and covert, is considered a barrier to collaboration.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2290-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Understanding the nature of health: New perspectives for medicine and public health. Improved wellbeing at lower costs

BACKGROUND

Current dilemmas of health care systems call for a new look at the nature of health. This is offered by the Meikirch model. We explore its hypothetical benefit for the future of medicine and public health. Meikirch model: It states: "Health is a dynamic state of wellbeing emergent from conducive interactions between individuals' potentials, life's demands, and social and environmental determinants." "Throughout the life course health results when an individuals' biologically given potential (BGP) and his or her personally acquired potential (PAP), interacting with social and environmental determinants, satisfactorily respond to the demands of life."

METHODS

We explored the Meikirch model's possible applications for personal and public health care.

RESULTS

The PAP of each individual is the most modifiable component of the model. It responds to constructive social interactions and to personal growth. If an individual's PAP is nurtured to develop further, it likely will contribute much more to health than without fostering. It may also compensate for losses of the BGP. An ensuing new culture of health may markedly improve health in the society. The rising costs of health care presumably are due in part to the tragedy of the commons and to moral hazard. Health as a complex adaptive system offers new possibilities for patient care, particularly for general practitioners.

DISCUSSION

Analysis of health systems by the Meikirch model reveals that in many areas more can be done to improve people's health and to reduce health care costs than is done today. The Meikirch model appears promising for individual and public health in low and high income countries. Emphasizing health instead of disease the Meikirch model reinforces article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of the United Nations - that abandons the WHO definition - and thereby may contribute to its reinterpretation.