Details matter: Physician responses to multiple payments for the same activity.

Clicks: 181
ID: 17676
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #114 of 124 articles by views in Social science & medicine (1982)

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 124 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
The UK Quality and Outcomes Framework rewards general practices for achieving quality indicators for chronic disease management. Some indicators are multi-rewarded. For example, there are indicators for controlling blood pressure for patients with diabetes and for patients with chronic heart disease. Thus if a patient has diabetes and heart disease the practice is rewarded twice for controlling her blood pressure. Other indicators are singly rewarded: the incentivised activity is only for patients with single specific condition. We compare general practice performance on single and multi-reward indicators. We use a 2005/6-2012/13 panel of over 800 Scottish general practices, control for practice characteristics, practice fixed effects, indicator characteristics (whether the indicator was for measurement, treatment, or intermediate outcome, maximum payment, upper thresholds), condition, and year and cluster on indicators. We find that the proportion of patients with a given condition for whom a quality indicator was achieved was higher, and the proportion who were exception reported was lower, for multi-reward indicators than for single reward indicators. We also exploit the replacement of multi-reward smoking indicators by single reward indicators in 2006/7. Compared to indicators which were always single or always multi-reward, the proportion of the relevant patients for whom the smoking indicators were achieved fell when the smoking indicators were no longer multi-reward. Fine details of pay for performance schemes matter: they affect physician behaviour and patient outcomes.
Reference Key
feng2019detailssocial Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Feng, Yan;Gravelle, Hugh;
Journal Social science & medicine (1982)
Year 2019
DOI
S0277-9536(19)30318-1
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.