ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND
Although pay-for-performance (P4P) has become a central strategy for improving quality in US healthcare, questions persist about the effectiveness of these programs. A key question is whether quality improvement that occurs as a result of P4P programs is sustainable, particularly if incentives are removed.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate sustainability of performance levels following removal of performance-based incentives.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Observational cohort study that capitalized on a P4P program within the Veterans Health Administration (VA) that included adoption and subsequent removal of performance-based incentives for selected inpatient quality measures. The study sample comprised 128 acute care VA hospitals where performance was assessed between 2004 and 2010.
INTERVENTION
VA system managers set annual performance goals in consultation with clinical leaders, and report performance scores to medical centers on a quarterly basis. These scores inform performance-based incentives for facilities and their managers. Bonuses are distributed based on the attainment of these performance goals.
MEASUREMENTS
Seven quality of care measures for acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, and pneumonia linked to performance-based incentives.
RESULTS
Significant improvements in performance were observed for six of seven quality of care measures following adoption of performance-based incentives and were maintained up to the removal of the incentive; subsequently, the observed performance levels were sustained.
LIMITATIONS
This is a quasi-experimental study without a comparison group; causal conclusions are limited.
CONCLUSION
The maintenance of performance levels after removal of a performance-based incentive has implications for the implementation of Medicare’s value-based purchasing initiative and other P4P programs. Additional research is needed to better understand human and system-level factors that mediate sustainability of performance-based incentives.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Rosenthal MB, Frank RG, Li Z, Epstein AM. Early experience with pay-for-performance: from concept to practice. JAMA. 2005;294(14):1788–1793.
Millett C, Gray J, Saxena S, Netuveli G, Majeed A. Impact of a pay-for-performance incentive on support for smoking cessation and on smoking prevalence among people with diabetes. CMAJ. 2007;176(12):1705–1710.
Doran T, Fullwood C, Gravelle H, Reeves D, Kontopantelis E, Hiroeh U, et al. Pay-for-performance programs in family practices in the United Kingdom. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(4):375–384.
Chung S, Palaniappan LP, Trujillo LM, Rubin HR, Luft HS. Effect of physician-specific pay-for-performance incentives in a large group practice. Am J Manag Care. 2010;16(2):e35–e42.
Christianson JB, Leatherman S, Sutherland K. Lessons from evaluations of purchaser pay-for-performance programs: a review of the evidence. Med Care Res Rev. 2008;65(6 Suppl):5S–35S.
Glasgow JM, Scott-Caziewell JR, Kaboli PJ. Guiding inpatient quality improvement: a systematic review of lean and six sigma. Joint Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2010;36(12):533–540.
Medicare Program; Hospital Inpatient Value-Based Purchasing Program; Final Rule http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-05-06/html/2011-10568.htm In: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, ed: Department of Health and Human Services; 2011:26489–547.
Hysong SJ, Khan MM, Petersen LA. Passive monitoring versus active assessment of clinical performance: impact on measured quality of care. Med Care. 2011;49(10):883–890.
Glasgow JM, Davies ML, Kaboli PJ. Findings from a national improvement collaborative: are improvements sustained? BMJ Qual Saf. 2012;21(8):663–669.
Lester H, Schmittdiel J, Selby J, Fireman B, Campbell S, Lee J, et al. The impact of removing financial incentives from clinical quality indicators: longitudinal analysis of four Kaiser Permanente indicators. BMJ. 2010;340:c1898.
Kizer KW, Dudley RA. Extreme makeover: transformation of the veterans health care system. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:313–339.
Hannan EL, Kilburn H Jr, Racz M, Shields E, Chassin MR. Improving the outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery in New York State. JAMA. 1994;271(10):761–766.
Werner RM, Bradlow ET. Public reporting on hospital process improvements is linked to better patient outcomes. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(7):1319–1324.
Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M. Hospital performance reports: impact on quality, market share, and reputation. Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;24(4):1150–1160.
Smith MA, Wright A, Queram C, Lamb GC. Public reporting helped drive quality improvement in outpatient diabetes care among Wisconsin physician groups. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31(3):570–577.
Lindenauer PK, Remus D, Roman S, Rothberg MB, Benjamin EM, Ma A, et al. Public reporting and pay for performance in hospital quality improvement. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(5):486–496.
Bokhour BG, Burgess JF Jr, Hook JM, White B, Berlowitz D, Guldin MR, et al. Incentive implementation in physician practices: a qualitative study of practice executive perspectives on pay for performance. Med Care Res Rev. 2006;63(1 Suppl):73S–95S.
Acknowledgements
The work reported herein was supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research and Development Service (IIR 08-067-1) and an Investigator Award in Health Policy to Gary Young from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The authors had full access to and take full responsibility for the integrity of the data. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The authors would like to thank Terry Duncan for consultation on implementing time series models in MPLUS.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they do not have any conflicts of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Benzer, J.K., Young, G.J., Burgess, J.F. et al. Sustainability of Quality Improvement Following Removal of Pay-for-Performance Incentives. J GEN INTERN MED 29, 127–132 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2572-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2572-4