Patient Opinions Regarding ‘Pay for Performance for Patients’
- 345 Downloads
Pay for performance (P4P) programs have shown only modest improvements in outcomes and do not target patient behaviors. Many large employers and payers are turning to pay for performance for patients (P4P4P) to reduce health costs and improve the health of their covered populations. How these programs may be perceived by patients is unknown.
To assess patients’ opinion of the acceptability of P4P4P.
Cross-sectional self-administered survey.
Patients in waiting rooms in two university-based primary care clinics.
Participants were asked their opinions about paying people to quit smoking, lose weight, control their blood pressure, or control their diabetes.
Respondents were split on whether P4P4P is desirable. Thrity-six to 42% thought it was a good/excellent idea to pay smokers to quit smoking, obese people to lose weight, people with hypertension to control their blood pressure, or people with diabetes to control their blood sugar, while 41–44% of the sample thought it was a bad/very bad idea. Smokers and patients who were obese endorsed P4P4P more favorably as a means to achieving tobacco cessation and weight loss than their non-smoking and non-obese counterparts.
Acceptance of paying patients for performance by the general population is equivocal. Establishing the efficacy of paying patients for performance may help it gain wider acceptance.
KEY WORDSpay for performance patient acceptance of health care financial management
The work in this paper was supported by a grant from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, titled Collaboration to Reduce Disparities in Hypertension, grant no. ME-02-382.
The Commonwealth bears no responsibility for the content of this article. This paper was presented as a poster at the Society of General Internal Medicine 2007 National Meeting in Toronto, Canada, 2007.
Conflict of Interest
Drs. Long and Helweg-Larsen have no conflicts of interest in relationship to this work. Dr. Volpp received an honorarium from Astra Zeneca for convening a conference on medication adherence as well as receiving investigator initiated grant support from Pfizer for ongoing patient follow-up for a randomized controlled trial of copayment reductions that was initiated through the grant that also supported this work (the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania sponsored Collaboration to Reduce Disparities in Hypertension, grant no. ME-02-382).
- 6.Petersen LA, Woodard LD, Urech T, Daw C, Sookanan S. Does pay-for-performance improve the quality of health care? Annals Int Med. 2006;145(4):265–272.Google Scholar
- 11.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Annual smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and economic costs- United States, 1995–1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002;51(14):300–303.Google Scholar
- 12.Finkelstein EA, Fiebelkorn IC, Wang G. National medical spending attributable to overweight and obesity: how much, and who’s paying? Health Aff (Millwood). Jan–Jun 2003;Suppl Web Exclusives:W3-219-226. http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/hlthaff.w3.219v1/DC1 Last Accessed July 2, 2008
- 13.Yi D. For Many Employees, Fitness has its Prize. Los Angeles Times, March 12 2007.Google Scholar
- 14.Mcqueen MP. Wellness plans reach out to the healthy. Wall Street Journal Abstracts, 2007;March 28: D1.Google Scholar
- 15.Jordan S. Financial carrot is a healthy incentive, more companies use enticing benefits to lure workers into wellness programs. Omaha World Herald, 2007;March 25:A1.Google Scholar
- 16.Song KM. New health-benefits plan prompts county workers to diet and head for the gym. The Seattle Times, 2006;July 22:A1.Google Scholar
- 17.Conlin M. Get healthy _ or else. inside one company’s all-out attack on medical costs. Business Week Online, 2007;February 26. Available at http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_09/b4023001.htm Last Accessed July 2, 2008
- 19.West Virginia’s Medicaid State Plan Amendment (SPA) 06-02, approved by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, May 3, 2006. Available at http://www.wvdhhr.org/bms/oAdministration/bms_admin_WV_SPA06-02_20060503.pdf Last Accessed July 2, 2008
- 22.Lussier JP, Heil SH, Mongeon JA, Badger GJ, Higgins ST. A meta-analysis of voucher-based reinforcement therapy for substance use disorders. Addiction. 2005;101:102–203.Google Scholar
- 23.Higgins ST, Silverman K, eds. Motivating Behavior Change Among Illicit Drug Abusers: Research on Contingency Management Interventions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1999.Google Scholar