Performance measurement, public reporting, and pay-for-performance

Urol Clin North Am. 2009 Feb;36(1):37-48, vi. doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2008.08.003.

Abstract

The use of incentives to improve quality of care is spreading rapidly across the health care system. Public reporting (PR) and pay-for-performance (PFP) are two examples of incentive-based programs. Although conclusive level I evidence for the positive impacts of these PR and PFP is limited, individual states and the federal government have begun to adopt and pilot these programs for a variety of specific clinical conditions. This article reviews the principles of health care quality performance measurement; current reporting and pay-for-performance programs; and the most recent literature documenting positive, negative and future impacts of these types of programs on urologic practice.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • General Surgery
  • Health Personnel
  • Medicare
  • Motivation*
  • Patients / psychology
  • Physician Incentive Plans / economics*
  • Quality of Health Care*
  • United States
  • Urology