Does pay-for-performance improve surgical outcomes An evaluation of phase 2 of the premier hospital quality incentive demonstration

Annals of Surgery

Volumn 259, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 677-681

  Shih, Terry ^a   Nicholas, Lauren H ^a   Thumma, Jyothi R ^a   Birkmeyer, John D ^a   Dimick, Justin B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Coronary artery bypass; health services research; joint replacement; pay for performance; policy evaluation

Indexed keywords

ACCOUNTING; ACUTE KIDNEY FAILURE; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; EVALUATION STUDY; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL HEMORRHAGE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HUMAN; JOINT PROSTHESIS; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; LUNG EMBOLISM; LUNG INSUFFICIENCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL FEE; MEDICARE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; PNEUMONIA; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; POSTOPERATIVE THROMBOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REIMBURSEMENT; REWARD; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURGICAL INFECTION; SURGICAL MORTALITY;

AGED; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; FEMALE; HEALTH POLICY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MEDICARE; ODDS RATIO; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; REIMBURSEMENT, INCENTIVE; RISK ADJUSTMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84895924623     PISSN: 00034932     EISSN: 15281140     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000425     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Department of Health and Human Services; Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Medicare Program; Hospital Inpatient Value-Based Purchasing program. Final rule. Fed Regist. 2011;76:26490-26547.
2. Ryan AM. Effects of the Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration on Medicare patient mortality and cost. Health Serv Res. 2009;44:821-842.
3. Glickman SW, Ou FS, Delong ER, et al. Pay for performance, quality of care, and outcomes in acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2007;297:2373-2380.
4. Lindenauer PK, Remus D, Roman S, et al. Public reporting and pay for performance in hospital quality improvement. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:486-496.
5. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Premier Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration Rewarding Superior Quality Care Fact Sheet December 2011. Available at http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient- Assessment-Instruments/HospitalQualityInits/Downloads/ HospitalPremierPressRelease-FactSheet.pdf. Accessed November 12, 2013.
6. Jha AK, Joynt KE, Orav EJ, et al. The long-term effect of premier pay for performance on patient outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1606-1615.
7. Ryan AM, Blustein J, Casalino LP. Medicare's flagship test of pay-forperformance did not spur more rapid quality improvement among lowperforming hospitals. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31:797-805.
8. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. Overview of the State Inpatient Databases. Available at http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/sidoverview.jsp. Accessed May 31, 2013.
9. Casalino LP, Elster A, Eisenberg A, et al.Will pay-for-performance and quality reporting affect health care disparities Health Aff (Millwood). 2007;26:w405-w414.
10. Colla CH, Wennberg DE, Meara E, et al. Spending differences associated with the Medicare Physician Group Practice Demonstration. JAMA. 2012;308:1015-1023.
11. Volpp KG, Rosen AK, Rosenbaum PR, et al. Mortality among hospitalized Medicare beneficiaries in the first 2 years following ACGME resident duty hour reform. JAMA. 2007;298:975-983.
12. Wooldridge JM. Introductory Econometrics : A Modern Approach. 5th ed. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning; 2012.
13. Iezzoni L, Daley J, Heeren T, et al. Identifying complications of care using administrative data. Med Care. 1994;32:700-715.
14. Weingart S, Iezzoni L, Davis R, et al. Use of administrative data to find substandard care: Validation of the Complications Screening Program. Med Care. 2000;38:796-806.
15. Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, et al. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36:8-27.
16. Southern DA, Quan H, Ghali WA. Comparison of the Elixhauser and Charlson/Deyo methods of comorbidity measurement in administrative data. Med Care. 2004;42:355-360.
17. Donald SG, Lang K. Inference with difference-in-differences and other panel data. Rev of Econ Stat. 2007;89:221-233.
18. Werner RM, Kolstad JT, Stuart EA, et al. The effect of pay-for-performance in hospitals: Lessons for quality improvement. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011; 30:690-698.
19. Nguyen NT,Hohmann S, Slone J, et al. Improved bariatric surgery outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries after implementation of the Medicare national coverage determination. Arch Surg. 2010;145:72-78.
20. Iezzoni LI. Assessing quality using administrative data. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:666-674.
21. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Hospital Value-Based Purchasing program. Available at http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality- Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/hospital-value-based-purchasing/ index.html. Accessed December 10, 2012.
22. Werner RM, Dudley RA. Medicare's new hospital Value-Based Purchasing program is likely to have only a small impact on hospital payments. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31:1932-1940.
23. Ryan AM, Blustein J. The effect of the MassHealth hospital pay-forperformance program on quality. Health Serv Res. 2011;46:712-728.
24. Sutton M, Nikolova S, Boaden R, et al. Reduced mortality with hospital pay for performance in England. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1821-1828.