Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Aug;47(4):1418-36.
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2012.01393.x. Epub 2012 Mar 14.

The effect of Phase 2 of the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration on incentive payments to hospitals caring for disadvantaged patients

Affiliations

The effect of Phase 2 of the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration on incentive payments to hospitals caring for disadvantaged patients

Andrew M Ryan et al. Health Serv Res. 2012 Aug.

Abstract

Objective: The Medicare and Premier Inc. Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration (HQID), a hospital-based pay-for-performance program, changed its incentive design from one rewarding only high performance (Phase 1) to another rewarding high performance, moderate performance, and improvement (Phase 2). We tested whether this design change reduced the gap in incentive payments among hospitals treating patients across the gradient of socioeconomic disadvantage.

Data: To estimate incentive payments in both phases, we used data from the Premier Inc. website and from Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files. We used data from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Impact File to identify hospital characteristics.

Study design: Hospitals were divided into quartiles based on their Disproportionate Share Index (DSH), from lowest disadvantage (Quartile 1) to highest disadvantage (Quartile 4). In both phases of the HQID, we tested for differences across the DSH quartiles for three outcomes: (1) receipt of any incentive payments; (2) total incentive payments; and (3) incentive payments per discharge. For each of the study outcomes, we performed a hospital-level difference-in-differences analysis to test whether the gap between Quartile 1 and the other quartiles decreased from Phase 1 to Phase 2.

Principal findings: In Phase 1, there were significant gaps across the DSH quartiles for the receipt of any payment and for payment per discharge. In Phase 2, the gap was not significant for the receipt of any payment, but it remained significant for payment per discharge. For the receipt of any incentive payment, difference-in-difference estimates showed significant reductions in the gap between Quartile 1 and the other quartiles (Quartile 2, 17.5 percentage points [p < .05]; Quartile 3, 18.1 percentage points [p < .01]; Quartile 4, 28.3 percentage points [p < .01]). For payments per discharge, the gap was also significantly reduced between Quartile 1 and the other quartiles (Quartile 2, $14.92 per discharge [p < .10]; Quartile 3, $17.34 per discharge [p < .05]; Quartile 4, $21.31 per discharge [p < .01]). There were no significant reductions in the gap for total payments.

Conclusions: The design change in the HQID reduced the disparity in the receipt of any incentive payment and for incentive payments per discharge between hospitals caring for the most and least socioeconomically disadvantaged patient populations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trends in Receipt of Any Payment, Total Payment, and Payment per Admission by Disproportionate Share Index Quartiles. Note: dashed vertical line denotes period immediately preceding start of phase 2 of Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration (HQID)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Blustein J, Borden WB, Valentine M. “Hospital Performance, the Local Economy, and the Local Workforce: Findings from a US National Longitudinal Study”. PLoS Med. 2010;7(6):e1000297. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Borden WB, Blustein J. “Valuing Improvement in Value Based Purchasing”. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. 2012 DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.111.962811. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buntin MB, Zaslavsky AM. “Too Much Ado about Two-Part Models and Transformation? Comparing Methods of Modeling Medicare Expenditures”. Journal of Health Economics. 2004;23(3):525–42. - PubMed
    1. Casalino LP, Elster A, Eisenberg A, Lewis E, Montgomery J, Ramos D. “Will Pay-for-Performance and Quality Reporting Affect Health Care Disparities?”. Health Affairs (Millwood) 2007;26(3):w405–14. - PubMed
    1. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. “Medicare Program; Hospital Inpatient Value-Based Purchasing Program. Final Rule”. Federal Register. 2011;76(88):26490–547. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources