Pay for performance programs in Australia: a need for guiding principles
- PMID: 18980570
- DOI: 10.1071/ah080740
Pay for performance programs in Australia: a need for guiding principles
Abstract
Pay-for-performance (P4P) programs which reward clinical providers with incentive payments based on one or more measures of quality of care are now common in the United States and the United Kingdom and it is likely they will attract increasing interest in Australia. However, empirical evidence demonstrating effectiveness of such programs is limited and many existing programs have not had rigorous outcome evaluation. To maximise success, future P4P programs should incorporate the lessons and insights obtained from previous experience. Based on a review of published trials, program evaluations and position statements, the following principles that may guide future program design and implementation were synthesised: 1) formulate a rationale and a business case for P4P; 2) use established evidence-based performance measures; 3) use rigorous and verifiable methods of data collection and analysis; 4) define performance targets using absolute and relative thresholds; 5) use rewards that are sufficient, equitable and transparent; 6) address appropriateness of provider responses and avoid perverse incentives; 7) implement communication and feedback strategies; 8) use existing organisational structures to implement P4P programs; 9) attribute credit for performance to participants in ways that foster population-based perspectives; and 10) invest in outcomes and health service research. Recommendations flowing from these principles relevant to Australian settings are provided.
Similar articles
-
Key issues in the design of pay for performance programs.Eur J Health Econ. 2013 Feb;14(1):117-31. doi: 10.1007/s10198-011-0347-6. Epub 2011 Sep 1. Eur J Health Econ. 2013. PMID: 21882009 Free PMC article.
-
Pay for performance in health care: strategic issues for Australian experiments.Med J Aust. 2007 Jul 2;187(1):31-5. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb01111.x. Med J Aust. 2007. PMID: 17605700 Review.
-
Systematic review: Effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care.BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Aug 23;10:247. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-247. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010. PMID: 20731816 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Implementing pay-for-performance in Australian primary care: lessons from the United Kingdom and the United States.Med J Aust. 2010 Oct 4;193(7):408-11. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb03971.x. Med J Aust. 2010. PMID: 20919973
-
The effect of financial incentives on the quality of health care provided by primary care physicians.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Sep 7;(9):CD008451. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008451.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011. PMID: 21901722 Review.
Cited by
-
Comparison of pay-for-performance (P4P) programs in primary care of selected countries: a comparative study.BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Aug 14;23(1):865. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09841-6. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023. PMID: 37580717 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
