The long-term effect of premier pay for performance on patient outcomes
- PMID: 22455751
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsa1112351
The long-term effect of premier pay for performance on patient outcomes
Abstract
Background: Pay for performance has become a central strategy in the drive to improve health care. We assessed the long-term effect of the Medicare Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration (HQID) on patient outcomes.
Methods: We used Medicare data to compare outcomes between the 252 hospitals participating in the Premier HQID and 3363 control hospitals participating in public reporting alone. We examined 30-day mortality among more than 6 million patients who had acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or pneumonia or who underwent coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2003 and 2009.
Results: At baseline, the composite 30-day mortality was similar for Premier and non-Premier hospitals (12.33% and 12.40%, respectively; difference, -0.07 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.40 to 0.26). The rates of decline in mortality per quarter at the two types of hospitals were also similar (0.04% and 0.04%, respectively; difference, -0.01 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.01), and mortality remained similar after 6 years under the pay-for-performance system (11.82% for Premier hospitals and 11.74% for non-Premier hospitals; difference, 0.08 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.30 to 0.46). We found that the effects of pay for performance on mortality did not differ significantly among conditions for which outcomes were explicitly linked to incentives (acute myocardial infarction and CABG) and among conditions not linked to incentives (congestive heart failure and pneumonia) (P=0.36 for interaction). Among hospitals that were poor performers at baseline, mortality was similar in the two groups of hospitals at the start of the study (15.12% and 14.73%; difference, 0.39 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.36 to 1.15), with similar rates of improvement per quarter (0.10% and 0.07%; difference, -0.03 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.02) and similar mortality rates at the end of the study (13.37% and 13.21%; difference, 0.15 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.70 to 1.01).
Conclusions: We found no evidence that the largest hospital-based pay-for-performance program led to a decrease in 30-day mortality. Expectations of improved outcomes for programs modeled after Premier HQID should therefore remain modest.
Comment in
-
Premier pay for performance and patient outcomes.N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 26;367(4):381; author reply 382-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1206170. N Engl J Med. 2012. PMID: 22830475 No abstract available.
-
Premier pay for performance and patient outcomes.N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 26;367(4):381-2; author reply 382-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1206170. N Engl J Med. 2012. PMID: 22830476 No abstract available.
-
Premier pay for performance and patient outcomes.N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 26;367(4):382; author reply 382-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1206170. N Engl J Med. 2012. PMID: 22830477 No abstract available.
-
Testing the incentive power of pay for performance.Virtual Mentor. 2013 Jul 1;15(7):587-91. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2013.15.7.jdsc1-1307. Virtual Mentor. 2013. PMID: 23890430 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Does pay-for-performance improve surgical outcomes? An evaluation of phase 2 of the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration.Ann Surg. 2014 Apr;259(4):677-81. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000425. Ann Surg. 2014. PMID: 24368657 Free PMC article.
-
Association between the Value-Based Purchasing pay for performance program and patient mortality in US hospitals: observational study.BMJ. 2016 May 9;353:i2214. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i2214. BMJ. 2016. PMID: 27160187 Free PMC article.
-
Public reporting and pay for performance in hospital quality improvement.N Engl J Med. 2007 Feb 1;356(5):486-96. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa064964. Epub 2007 Jan 26. N Engl J Med. 2007. PMID: 17259444
-
The cost-effectiveness of using financial incentives to improve provider quality: a framework and application.Health Econ. 2014 Jan;23(1):1-13. doi: 10.1002/hec.2978. Epub 2013 Aug 14. Health Econ. 2014. PMID: 23943496 Review.
-
Pay for performance in the hospital setting: what is the state of the evidence?Am J Med Qual. 2009 Jan-Feb;24(1):19-28. doi: 10.1177/1062860608326634. Epub 2008 Dec 10. Am J Med Qual. 2009. PMID: 19073941 Review.
Cited by
-
Current Trends in Chronic Non-Communicable Disease Management: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Past Two Decades.J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024 Nov 1;17:5001-5017. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S482427. eCollection 2024. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024. PMID: 39503001 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-effectiveness of implementing performance-based financing for improving maternal and child health in Ethiopia.PLoS One. 2024 Jul 15;19(7):e0305698. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305698. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 39008471 Free PMC article.
-
Can performance-based financing improve efficiency of health centers in Ethiopia? A Malmquist Productivity Index analysis.BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Jun 1;24(1):696. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11127-4. BMC Health Serv Res. 2024. PMID: 38822318 Free PMC article.
-
Facilitating and Inhibiting Factors in the Design, Implementation, and Applicability of Value-Based Payment Models: A Systematic Literature Review.Med Care Res Rev. 2023 Oct;80(5):467-483. doi: 10.1177/10775587231160920. Epub 2023 Mar 23. Med Care Res Rev. 2023. PMID: 36951451 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The effect of performance pay incentives on market frictions: evidence from medicare.Int J Health Econ Manag. 2023 Mar;23(1):27-57. doi: 10.1007/s10754-022-09339-4. Epub 2022 Dec 22. Int J Health Econ Manag. 2023. PMID: 36543962
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical