The effect of an incentive program on quality of care in diabetes management

Health Economics

Volumn 18, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 1091-1108

  Scott, Anthony ^a   Schurer, Stefanie ^a   Jensen, Paul H ^a   Sivey, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bivariate probit model; Exclusion restrictions; Incentives; Pay for performance; Quality of care

Indexed keywords

ANTIDIABETIC AGENT; HEMOGLOBIN A1C; GLYCOSYLATED HEMOGLOBIN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIABETES MELLITUS; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTICE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MANAGED CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; REIMBURSEMENT; SUPPORT GROUP; AGE; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; ECONOMICS; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; SEX DIFFERENCE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

AGE FACTORS; DIABETES MELLITUS; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; FEMALE; HEMOGLOBIN A, GLYCOSYLATED; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; PHYSICIAN INCENTIVE PLANS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 70349196667     PISSN: 10579230     EISSN: 10991050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hec.1536     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Angrist J, Imbens G, Rubin D. 1996. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association 91: 444-455.
2. Atella V, Deb P. 2008. Are primary care physicians, public and private sector specialists substitutes or complements? Evidence from a simultaneous equations model for count data. Journal of Health Economics 27: 770-785.
3. Australian Institute for Health and Welfare. 2008. Diabetes: Australian Facts 2008. Australian Institute for Health and Welfare, Canberra.
4. Balia S, Jones A. 2008. Mortality, lifestyle, and socio-economic status. Journal of Health Economics 27(1): 1-26.
5. Beilby J. 2003. Attendance Item Restructure Working Group. Final Report, Royal Australian College of General Practitioners.
6. Britt H, Miller G, Knox S et al. 2005. General practice activity in Australia 2004-2005. General Practice Series AIWH (18).
7. Chaix-Couturier C, Durand-Zaleski I, Jolly D et al. 2000. Effects of financial incentives on medical practice: results from a systematic review of the literature and methodological issues. Internationl Journal for Quality in Health Care 12(2): 133-142.
8. Christianson JB, Leatherman S, Sutherland K. 2008. Lessons from evaluations of purchaser pay-for-performance programs: a review of the evidence. Medical Care Research and Review 65: 5S-35S.
9. DeDomenico M, Yu C, Taggart J et al. 2005. Barriers and Enablers to the Uptake of NIDP Diabetes Service Incentive Payments in General Practice. Centre for General Practice Integration Studies, School of Public Health and Community Medicine (UNSW).
10. Diabetes Australia. 2007. Diabetes management in general practice. Annual Report 2007/08.
11. Doran T, Fullwood C, Gravelle H et al. 2006. Pay-for-performance programs in family practices in the United Kingdom. New England Journal of Medicine 355: 375-384.
12. Dumont E, Fortin B, Jacquemet N et al. 2008. Physicians' multitasking and incentives: empirical evidence from a natural experiment. Journal of Health Economics 27: 1436-1450.
13. Francois P, Vlassopoulus M. 2007. Pro-social motivation and delivery of social services. July 5 Mimeo.
14. Georgiou A, Burns J, Harris M. 2004. Gp claims for completing diabetes 'cycle of care'. Australian Family Physician 33: 755-757.
15. Gravelle H, Sutton M, Ma A. 2008. Doctor behaviour under a pay for performance contract: further evidence from the quality and outcomes framework. CHE Research Paper 34.
16. Harris M, Georgiou A, Powell-Davies P. 2004. Diabetes service incentive payments by division 2001/2002 to 2003/2004. Report of National Division Diabetes Program Division Diabetes & CVD Quality Imrovement Program. Centre for GP Integration Studies, School of Public Health & Community Medicine, UNSW November.
17. Heckman JJ. 1978. Dummy endogenous variables in a simultaneous equation system. Econometrica 46: 931-959.
18. Hordacre A, Kalucy MKE, Moretti C. 2006. Making the connections. Report of the 2004-2005 Annual Survey of Divisions of General Practice. Primary Health Care Research & Information Service, Department of General Practice, Flinders University, Adelaide.
19. Kim C, Steers WN, Herman WH et al. 2007. Physician compensation from salary and quality of diabetes care. General Internal Medicine 22: 448-452.
20. Maddala G. 1983. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
21. Manski CF. 1993. Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. Review of Economics and Statistics 60: 531-542.
22. Manski CF. 1995. Identification Problems in the Social Sciences. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
23. Medicare Australia. Accessed 21 March 2009. Practice Incentive Program Guidelines http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/provider/incentives/pip/ index.jsp.
24. Monfardini C, Radice R. 2008. Testing exogeneity in the bivariate probit model: a Monte Carlo study. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 70(2): 0305-9049.
25. National Institute of Clinical Studies. 2003. Evidence-Practice Gaps Report, Volume 1. NICS, Melbourne.
26. Proudfoot J, Infante F, Holton C et al. 2007. Organisational capacity and chronic disease care. An Australian general practice perspective. Australian Family Physician 36(3): 286-288.
27. Rashad I, Kaestner R. 2004. Teenage sex, drugs and alcohol use: problems identifying the cause of risky behaviour. Journal of Health Economics 23: 493-503.
28. Robinson JC, Shortell SM, Li R et al. 2004. The alignement and blending of payment incentives within physician organizations. Health Services Research 39(5): 1589-1606.
29. Roland M. 2004. Linking physicians' pay to the quality of care-a major experiment in the United Kingdom. The New England Journal of Medicine 351(14): 1448-1454.
30. Rosenthal MB, Frank RG, Li Z et al. 2005. Early experience with pay-for-performance from concept to practice. Journal of the American Medical Association 294: 1788-1793.
31. Saunders M, Schattner P, Mathews M. 2008. Diabetes cycle of care in general practice. Do government incentives help? Australian Family Physician 37(9): 781-784.
32. Schneider U, Ulrich V. 2008. The physician-patient relationship revisited: the patient's view. International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics 8: 279-300.
33. Scott A, Coote W. 2007. Whither divisions of general practice? An empirical and policy analysis of the impact of Divisions within the Australian health care system. Medical Journal of Australia 187(2): 95-99.
34. Scott A, Shiell AM. 1997. Do fee descriptors influence treatment choices in general practice? A multilevel discrete choice model. Journal of Health Economics 16(3): 323-342.
35. Shen J, Andersen R, Brook R et al. 2004. The effects of payment method on clinical decision-making. Medical Care 42(3): 297-302.
36. Sutton M, Elder R, Guthrie B et al. 2009. Record rewards: The effects of targeted quality incentives on the recording of risk factors by primary care providers. Health Economics, DOI: 10.1002/ hec.1440. Online print.
37. UKPDS 33. 1998. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. Lancet 352(9131): 837-853.
38. Wilde J. 2000. Identification of multiple equation probit models with endogenous dummy regressors. Economics Letters 69(3): 309-312.
39. WONCA International Classification Committee. 2005. International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2-R). Oxford University Press: New York.
40. Young GJ, Meterko M, Beckman H et al. 2007. Effects of paying physicians based on their relative performance for quality. General Internal Medicine 22: 872-876.
41. Zhang X, Zhao X, Harris A. 2009. Chronic diseases and labour force participation in australia. Journal of Health Economics 28: 91-108.