The Linkages Between Reimbursement and Prevention: A Mixed-Methods Approach

Background: The benefits of prevention are widely recognized; ranging from avoiding disease onset to substantially reducing disease burden, which is especially relevant considering the increasing prevalence of chronic diseases. However, its delivery has encountered numerous obstacles in healthcare. While healthcare professionals play an important role in stimulating prevention, their behaviors can be influenced by incentives related to reimbursement schemes.

Purpose: The purpose of this research is to obtain a detailed description and explanation of how reimbursement schemes specifically impact primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary prevention.

Methods: Our study takes a mixed-methods approach. Based on a rapid review of the literature, we include and assess 27 studies. Moreover, we conducted semi-structured interviews with eight Dutch healthcare professionals and two representatives of insurance companies, to obtain a deeper understanding of healthcare professionals' behaviors in response to incentives.

Results: Nor fee-for-service (FFS) nor salary can be unambiguously linked to higher or lower provision of preventive services. However, results suggest that FFS's widely reported incentive to increase production might work in favor of preventive services such as immunizations but provide less incentives for chronic disease management. Salary's incentive toward prevention will be (partially) determined by provider-organization's characteristics and reimbursement. Pay-for-performance (P4P) is not always necessarily translated into better health outcomes, effective prevention, or adequate chronic disease management. P4P is considered disruptive by professionals and our results expose how it can lead professionals to resort to (over)medicalization in order to achieve targets. Relatively new forms of reimbursement such as population-based payment may incentivize professionals to adapt the delivery of care to facilitate the delivery of some forms of prevention.

Conclusion: There is not one reimbursement scheme that will stimulate all levels of prevention. Certain types of reimbursement work well for certain types of preventive care services. A volume incentive could be beneficial for prevention activities that are easy to specify. Population-based capitation can help promote preventive activities that require efforts that are not incentivized under other reimbursements, for instance activities that are not easily specified, such as providing education on lifestyle factors related to a patient's (chronic) disease.

Is the evidence on the effectiveness of pay for performance schemes in healthcare changing? Evidence from a meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

This study investigated if the evidence on the success of the Pay for Performance (P4P) schemes in healthcare is changing as the schemes continue to evolve by updating a previous systematic review.

METHODS

A meta-regression analysis using 116 studies evaluating P4P schemes published between January 2010 to February 2018. The effects of the research design, incentive schemes, use of incentives, and the size of the payment to revenue ratio on the proportion of statically significant effects in each study were examined.

RESULTS

There was evidence of an increase in the range of countries adopting P4P schemes and weak evidence that the proportion of studies with statistically significant effects have increased. Factors hypothesized to influence the success of schemes have not changed. Studies evaluating P4P schemes which made payments for improvement over time, were associated with a lower proportion of statistically significant effects. There was weak evidence of a positive association between the incentives' size and the proportion of statistically significant effects.

CONCLUSION

The evidence on the effectiveness of P4P schemes is evolving slowly, with little evidence that lessons are being learned concerning the design and evaluation of P4P schemes.

Financial Incentives to Encourage Value-Based Health Care

This article reviews the literature on the use of financial incentives to improve the provision of value-based health care. Eighty studies of 44 schemes from 10 countries were reviewed. The proportion of positive and statistically significant outcomes was close to .5. Stronger study designs were associated with a lower proportion of positive effects. There were no differences between studies conducted in the United States compared with other countries; between schemes that targeted hospitals or primary care; or between schemes combining pay for performance with rewards for reducing costs, relative to pay for performance schemes alone. Paying for performance improvement is less likely to be effective. Allowing payments to be used for specific purposes, such as quality improvement, had a higher likelihood of a positive effect, compared with using funding for physician income. Finally, the size of incentive payments relative to revenue was not associated with the proportion of positive outcomes.

The association between participation in a pay-for-performance program and macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes in Taiwan: A nationwide population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes and diabetes-related complications are major causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide and contribute substantially to health care costs. Proper care can prevent or delay vascular complications in people with type 2 diabetes. We sought to examine whether a diabetes pay-for-performance (P4P) program under Taiwan's National Health Insurance program decreased risk of macrovascular complications in type 2 diabetes patients, and associated risk factors.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD

We conducted a longitudinal observational case and control cohort study using two nationwide population-based databases in Taiwan, 2007-2012. Type 2 diabetes patients with a primary diabetes diagnosis in year 2007 and 2008 were included. We excluded patients with any diabetes complications within 2years before the index date. A propensity score matching approach was used to determine comparable P4P and non-P4P groups. We followed each P4P and non-P4P patient until December 31, 2012. Complication incidence rates per 1000 person-years for each complication were calculated.

RESULTS

Overall, our results indicated that P4P patients had lower risk of macrovascular complications than non-P4P patients. Specifically, hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 0.84 (0.80-0.88) for stroke, 0.83 (0.75-0.92) for myocardial infarction, 0.72 (0.60-0.85) for atrial fibrillation, 0.93 (0.87-0.98) for heart failure, 0.61 (0.50-0.73) for gangrene, and 0.83 (0.74-0.93) for ulcer of lower limbs.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with patients not enrolled in the P4P program, P4P patients had lower risk of developing serious vascular complications. Our empirical findings provide evidence for the potential long-term benefit of P4P programs in reducing risks of macrovascular complications.

Effect of a national primary care pay for performance scheme on emergency hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions: controlled longitudinal study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the impact of a national primary care pay for performance scheme, the Quality and Outcomes Framework in England, on emergency hospital admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs).

DESIGN

Controlled longitudinal study.

SETTING

English National Health Service between 1998/99 and 2010/11.

PARTICIPANTS

Populations registered with each of 6975 family practices in England.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Year specific differences between trend adjusted emergency hospital admission rates for incentivised ACSCs before and after the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework scheme and two comparators: non-incentivised ACSCs and non-ACSCs.

RESULTS

Incentivised ACSC admissions showed a relative reduction of 2.7% (95% confidence interval 1.6% to 3.8%) in the first year of the Quality and Outcomes Framework compared with ACSCs that were not incentivised. This increased to a relative reduction of 8.0% (6.9% to 9.1%) in 2010/11. Compared with conditions that are not regarded as being influenced by the quality of ambulatory care (non-ACSCs), incentivised ACSCs also showed a relative reduction in rates of emergency admissions of 2.8% (2.0% to 3.6%) in the first year increasing to 10.9% (10.1% to 11.7%) by 2010/11.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of a major national pay for performance scheme for primary care in England was associated with a decrease in emergency admissions for incentivised conditions compared with conditions that were not incentivised. Contemporaneous health service changes seem unlikely to have caused the sharp change in the trajectory of incentivised ACSC admissions immediately after the introduction of the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The decrease seems larger than would be expected from the changes in the process measures that were incentivised, suggesting that the pay for performance scheme may have had impacts on quality of care beyond the directly incentivised activities.

The large social value resulting from use of statins warrants steps to improve adherence and broaden treatment

Statins are considered a clinically important breakthrough for the treatment of cardiovascular disease. However, their social value at the US population level has not previously been studied. From an economic perspective, social value measures the quantity of resources--in monetary terms--that society would be willing to give up in order to retain the survival gains resulting from statin therapy. Using combined population and clinical data, this article calculates statins' social value to consumers, or the value of survival benefits above actual payments for the drug, and to producers, or drug revenues, for the period 1987-2008. National survey data suggest that statin therapy reduced low-density lipoprotein levels by 18.8 percent, which translated into roughly 40,000 fewer deaths, 60,000 fewer hospitalizations for heart attacks, and 22,000 fewer hospitalizations for strokes in 2008. For people starting statin therapy in 1987-2008, consumers captured $947.4 billion (76 percent) of the total social value of the survival gains. Even greater consumer benefits could be achieved in the future if statins were prescribed in full compliance with cholesterol guidelines and patients adhered to prescribed regimens. In addition, statin costs are declining because of patent expirations. Policy makers should consider interventions at the patient and provider levels to encourage both therapy for untreated patients with high cholesterol and greater adherence after therapy is initiated.

Rewarding healthy behaviors--pay patients for performance

Despite a considerable investment of resources into pay for performance, preliminary studies have found that it may not be significantly more effective in improving health outcome measures when compared with voluntary quality improvement programs. Because patient behaviors ultimately affect health outcomes, I would propose a novel pay-for-performance program that rewards patients directly for achieving evidence-based health goals. These rewards would be in the form of discounts towards co-payments for doctor's visits, procedures, and medications, thereby potentially reducing cost and compliance issues. A pilot study recruiting patients with diabetes or hypertension, diseases with clear and objective outcome measures, would be useful to examine true costs, savings, and health outcomes of such a reward program. Offering incentives to patients for reaching health goals has the potential to foster a stronger partnership between doctors and patients and improve health outcomes.