2014
DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa1400962
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Long-Term Effect of Hospital Pay for Performance on Mortality in England

Abstract: Short-term relative reductions in mortality for conditions linked to financial incentives in hospitals participating in a pay-for-performance program in England were not maintained.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
52
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
52
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1012 A P4P program in all National Health Service hospitals in one region of England was associated with a clinically significant reduction in mortality for pneumonia in the first 18 months after implementation, 13 but this benefit did not persist to 42 months. 14 Evaluations of P4P programs in nonhospital settings and other programs specifically targeting physicians have shown mixed results. 1517 On the other hand, disincentives in the form of reduced payments by CMS for health care–associated infections did not measurably change infection rates.…”
Section: Extrinsic Motivation To Improve Qualitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1012 A P4P program in all National Health Service hospitals in one region of England was associated with a clinically significant reduction in mortality for pneumonia in the first 18 months after implementation, 13 but this benefit did not persist to 42 months. 14 Evaluations of P4P programs in nonhospital settings and other programs specifically targeting physicians have shown mixed results. 1517 On the other hand, disincentives in the form of reduced payments by CMS for health care–associated infections did not measurably change infection rates.…”
Section: Extrinsic Motivation To Improve Qualitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…40 The five year evaluation of a region-wide pay for performance scheme similarly had to adapt as the intervention changed mid-scheme with introduction of new commissioning targets. 41 These contemporaneous evaluations require different rules of engagement between the service and researchers, challenging traditional assumptions about objectivity and independence. Critical distance is important, but good evaluation teams will work closely with study sites, sharing findings to test the validity of emerging data.…”
Section: Difference In Difference Analysis-statistical Methods For Commentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9 Harrison and colleagues' study 2 contributes substantially to the small evidence base evaluating whether pay for performance improves longer term outcomes for patients. [10][11][12][13][14] Although their analysis found significant reductions in related emergency hospital admissions, the mechanism by which this might have occurred is uncertain. The authors' therefore concluded that pay for performance is no more of a "magic bullet" than any other quality improvement method, and that long term improvement is likely to require the persistent use of many different types of intervention.…”
Section: Editorialsmentioning
confidence: 99%