Impact assessment of a pay-for-performance program on breast cancer screening in France using micro data

Sicsic, Jonathan; Franc, Carine

doi:10.1007/s10198-016-0813-2

Cited by 20 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Four studies were executed in the US, with their focus varying from publicly funded safety-net community health centers ( 30 ), Medicaid-focused managed care ( 26 ), a commercial health plan ( 23 ) to a cross-sector study ( 45 ). Two studies in a country with a Bismarck model: one in Estonia ( 42 ) and one in France ( 49 ). One study was executed in Mozambique and concerned a donor-sponsored program ( 47 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As presented in Table 1 , a total of 20 studies focus on the relationship between P4P bonuses and prevention ( 23 , 24 , 26 , 28 , 30 – 32 , 34 , 35 , 37 – 40 , 42 – 44 , 46 – 49 ). Seven papers study P4P incentives awarded at practice level ( 26 , 28 , 34 , 39 , 43 , 47 , 48 ), from which four studies pertain to the Quality and Outcome Framework (QOF) P4P program in the UK, where incentives represent up to 25% of annual income ( 34 , 39 , 43 , 48 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Salvado

Elten

Raaij

2021

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Salvado

Elten

Raaij

2021

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Analysis of program impact on quality measures 22 (39%) (CHAUDHURI et al, 2016), (KRISTENSEN et al, 2014), (GILLAM; SIRIWARDENA; STEEL, 2012), (JHA et al, 2012), (WERNER et al, 2011), (SICSIC;FRANC, 2017), (JU KIM et al, 2017), (ANGIER et al, 2017), (COX et al, 2016), (ROSENTHAL et al, 2016), (MICHEL-LEPAGE; VENTELOU, 2016), (CHI et al, 2016), (POLI NETO et al, 2016), (DAS; GOPALAN; CHANDRAMOHAN, 2016), (WU et al, 2016), (GLEESON; KELLEHER; GARDNER, 2016), (CHEN;CHENG, 2016), (BASTIAN et al, 2016a), (ELLIOTT et al, 2016b), (CHAUDHURI et al, 2016), (BASTIAN et al, 2016b), (MURPHY et al, 2016) Descriptive analysis, advantages and disadvantages and points of attention 13 (23%) (FROIMSON et al, 2013b), (EIJKENAAR, 2013), (VAN HERCK et al, 2010a), (CARLSON et al, 2010), (ELBULUK;O'NEILL, 2017), (MILLER et al, 2017), (TABRIZI et al, 2017), (ANOUSHIRAVANI; IORIO, 2016), (CHEE et al, 2016), (KRETZSCHMAR et al, 2016), (KONDO et al, 2016) By arranging the articles by similarity of themes, as shown in table 3, it was observed that most of the studies analyzed (39%) evaluate the impact of performance-related pay programs on quality indicators. These studies generally make comparisons of groups under incentive influence against control groups without the incentive, comparing indicators before and after program implementation.…”

Section: Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of payment model on healthcare quality: A bibliometric study

Bianchini¹,

Berssaneti²,

Saut³

et al. 2020

GEPROS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Demographic and epidemiological changes require different healthcare management systems to treat chronic diseases, rather than acute illnesses with short-term costs. This scenario, added to the technological advances in medicine, contributed to the beginning of a global crisis in healthcare that forces improvements in cost and quality management. Therefore, this article aims to provide an overview of the research related to the impact of performance-related payment models in healthcare quality, through a bibliometric study. The adopted methodological approach mixes techniques of bibliometrics, keyword networks, co-authorship and co-citation networks and content analysis. The results show a stability in the number of publications in the past years, with a concentration of scientific production in the United States and the United Kingdom and in the field of medical knowledge. In Brazil, the issue is still nascent and represents an important gap to be explored, as well as studies that prove the long-term outcomes and the sustainability of the quality improvements after the removal of the incentive.

show abstract

“…After its introduction,other countries worldwide, such as France [18,19], Estonia [20] and Taiwan [21,22] started a P4P quality system for GPs to reward excellent outcomes. Despite the efforts, the spread of these programmes in Europe is still limited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Effectiveness of a P4P Scheme from the Italian General Practitioners’ Perspective: A Replication Study

Giancotti

Mauro

Rania

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A major problem of the primary healthcare systems is represented by the deficiencies in performance quality. Financial incentives can be used in order to improve the quality of healthcare. According to this, since 1993 many countries have introduced pay for performance reimbursement schemes to encourage practitioner behaviour to align with the specific objectives of the decision maker and to incentivize the provision of targeted services. In this context the study of Krauth et al. (2016) was the first in Europe to determine whether general practitioners would participate in a pay for performance programme and under what conditions. Our research replicates the German survey, adjusting it to the Italian context. This article explores whether financial incentives can improve the quality of healthcare from the perspective of general practitioners. The purposes were as follows: to assess the attitudes of Italian general practitioners towards the current remuneration scheme; to determine if they would participate in a pay for performance programme; and to analyse how such views vary among the groups of respondents. Methods Our tool for data collection was a questionnaire elaborated on the basis of a theoretical framework developed by Krauth et al. The questionnaires were distributed from September to December 2017. Results Results confirm that for a successful implementation of a quality-based compensation scheme, it is crucial to gain the acceptance and support of healthcare providers. Conclusions To ensure that healthcare providers can realistically achieve the programme’s targets, they should be involved in the implementation process. Our study offers useful information for developing an effectiveness remuneration scheme in Italy for general practice.

show abstract

Impact assessment of a pay-for-performance program on breast cancer screening in France using micro data

Cited by 20 publications

References 42 publications

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

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

Impact of payment model on healthcare quality: A bibliometric study

Exploring the Effectiveness of a P4P Scheme from the Italian General Practitioners’ Perspective: A Replication Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About