Pay-for-performance and accountability: Related themes in improving health care

Annals of Internal Medicine

Volumn 145, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 695-699

  Rowe, John W ^a,b  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^b Mailman School of Public Health ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; MEDICAL FEE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL PROFESSION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICARE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; ECONOMICS; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; STANDARD; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH CARE COSTS; INSURANCE, HEALTH; MANAGED CARE PROGRAMS; MEDICARE; PHYSICIAN INCENTIVE PLANS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33750936271     PISSN: 00034819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-9-200611070-00013     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Chernew ME, Hirth RA, Cutler DM. Increased spending on health care: how much can the United States afford? Health Aff (Millwood). 2003;22:15-25.
2. Rosenthal MB, Frank RG. What is the empirical basis for paying for quality in health care? Med Care Res Rev. 2006;63:135-57.
3. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. Strategies to Support Quality-based Purchasing: A Review of the Evidence. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2004:04-P024.
4. 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;355:375-84.
5. Epstein AM. Paying for performance in the United States and abroad [Editorial]. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:406-8.
6. ABIM Foundation, ACP-ASIM Foundation, European Federation of Internal Medicine. Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physician charter. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;196:113-4.
7. Association of Health Insurance Plans. National Survey of Physicians Regarding Pay for Performance. Washington, DC: Association of Health Insurance Plans; 2004.
8. Rosenthal MB, Fernandopulle R, Song HR, Landon B. Paying for quality: providers' incentives for quality improvement. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23:127-41.
9. Glied S, Zivin JG. How do doctors behave when some (but not all) of their patients are in managed care? J Health Econ. 2002;21:337-53.
10. Institute of Medicare. Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. Washington, DC: National Academy Pr; 2002.
11. Rosenthal MB, Frank RG, Li Z, Epstein AM. Early experience with pay-for-performance: from concept to practice. JAMA. 2005;294:1788-93.
12. Birkmeyer NJ, Birkmeyer JD. Strategies for improving surgical quality - should payers reward excellence or effort? N Engl J Med. 2006;354:864-70.
13. Lee TH, Zapert K. Do high-deductible health plans threaten quality of care? N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1202-4.
14. Ignagni K. Testimony on Examining Pay-for-Performance Measures and Other Trends in Employer-Sponsored Health Care before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations. Washington, DC: U.S. House of Representatives; 17 May 2005.
15. Epstein AM. Rolling down the runway: the challenges ahead for quality report cards. JAMA. 1998;279:1691-6.
16. Lauer G. California Pay-for-Performance Programs Draws National Attention. California Healthline. Oakland, CA: California Healthcare Foundation; 8 February 2006.
17. Aetna, Inc. Aetna Expands Availability of Network Option Based on Clinical Performance and Cost [Press release]. Hartford, CT: Aetna, Inc.; 2005.
18. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Fact Sheet: Medicare Pay for Performance (P4P) Initiatives [Press release]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2005.
19. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare Demonstration Shows Hospital Quality of Care Improves with Payments Tied to Quality [Press release]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2005.
20. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare Begins Performance-Based Payments for Physician Groups: New Demonstration Program Tests Financial Incentives for Improved Quality and Coordination in Large Group Practices [Press release]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2005.
21. DeBrantes F, Galvin RS, Lee TH. Bridges to excellence: building a business case for quality care. J Clin Outcomes Manag. 2003;439-446.
22. Milstein A, Galvin RS, Delbanco SF, Salber P, Buck CR Jr. Improving the safety of health care: the Leapfrog initiative. Eff Clin Pract. 2000;3:313-6.
23. Galvin RS, Delbanco S, Milstein A, Belden G. Has the leapfrog group had an impact on the health care market? Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;24:228-33.
24. Enthoven A, Fuchs VR, Ginsburg PB, Starfield B. Reforming America's Health Care System. Washington, DC: Human Resources Policy Association; 2006.
25. Mercer Human Resources Consulting. Companies Unite in Care Focused Purchasing Initiative to Push US New Health Care Market [Press release]. New York: Mercer Human Resource Consulting; 25 March 2004.
26. The Ambulatory Care Quality Alliance. Improving Clinical Quality and Consumer Decisionmaking. Background document. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Assessed at www.ahrq.gov/qual/aqaback.htm on 1 April 2006.
27. Choudhry NK, Fletcher RH, Soumerai SB. Systematic review: the relationship between clinical experience and quality of health care. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:260-73.