Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25024239/ below:

Effect of payment incentives on cancer screening in Ontario primary care

Affiliations

• ¹ Keenan Research Centre in the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada tara.kiran@utoronto.ca.
• ² Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
• ³ Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
• ⁴ Keenan Research Centre in the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

• PMID: 25024239
• PMCID: PMC4096468
• DOI: 10.1370/afm.1664

Item in Clipboard

Tara Kiran et al. Ann Fam Med. 2014 Jul.

• ¹ Keenan Research Centre in the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada tara.kiran@utoronto.ca.
• ² Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
• ³ Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
• ⁴ Keenan Research Centre in the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

• PMID: 25024239
• PMCID: PMC4096468
• DOI: 10.1370/afm.1664

Item in Clipboard

Purpose: There is limited evidence for the effectiveness of pay for performance despite its widespread use. We assessed whether the introduction of a pay-for-performance scheme for primary care physicians in Ontario, Canada, was associated with increased cancer screening rates and determined the amounts paid to physicians as part of the program.

Methods: We performed a longitudinal analysis using administrative data to determine cancer screening rates and incentive costs in each fiscal year from 1999/2000 to 2009/2010. We used a segmented linear regression analysis to assess whether there was a step change or change in screening rate trends after incentives were introduced in 2006/2007. We included all Ontarians eligible for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening.

Results: We found no significant step change in the screening rate for any of the 3 cancers the year after incentives were introduced. Colon cancer screening was increasing at a rate of 3.0% (95% CI, 2.3% to 3.7%) per year before the incentives were introduced and 4.7% (95% CI, 3.7% to 5.7%) per year after. The cervical and breast cancer screening rates did not change significantly from year to year before or after the incentives were introduced. Between 2006/2007 and 2009/2010, $28.3 million, $31.3 million, and $50.0 million were spent on financial incentives for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening, respectively.

Conclusions: The pay-for-performance scheme was associated with little or no improvement in screening rates despite substantial expenditure. Policy makers should consider other strategies for improving rates of cancer screening.

Keywords: cancer screening; delivery of health care; pay for performance; primary health care; quality of health care.

© 2014 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.

PubMed Disclaimer

Age- and sex-standardized cancer screening…

Age- and sex-standardized cancer screening rates and annual incentive costs from 1990–2000 to…

Age- and sex-standardized cancer screening rates and annual incentive costs from 1990–2000 to 2009–2010.

• Patient-centered medical home implementation and use of preventive services: the role of practice socioeconomic context.

  Markovitz AR, Alexander JA, Lantz PM, Paustian ML. Markovitz AR, et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2015 Apr;175(4):598-606. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.8263. JAMA Intern Med. 2015. PMID: 25686468 Free PMC article.

• Effect of provider and patient reminders, deployment of nurse practitioners, and financial incentives on cervical and breast cancer screening rates.

  Kaczorowski J, Hearps SJ, Lohfeld L, Goeree R, Donald F, Burgess K, Sebaldt RJ. Kaczorowski J, et al. Can Fam Physician. 2013 Jun;59(6):e282-9. Can Fam Physician. 2013. PMID: 23766067 Free PMC article.

• Effect of financial incentives on breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening delivery rates: Results from a systematic literature review.

  Mauro M, Rotundo G, Giancotti M. Mauro M, et al. Health Policy. 2019 Dec;123(12):1210-1220. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.09.012. Epub 2019 Sep 27. Health Policy. 2019. PMID: 31587819

• The effect of financial incentives on the quality of health care provided by primary care physicians.

  Scott A, Sivey P, Ait Ouakrim D, Willenberg L, Naccarella L, Furler J, Young D. Scott A, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Sep 7;(9):CD008451. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008451.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011. PMID: 21901722 Review.

• Effects of financial incentives on medical practice: results from a systematic review of the literature and methodological issues.

  Chaix-Couturier C, Durand-Zaleski I, Jolly D, Durieux P. Chaix-Couturier C, et al. Int J Qual Health Care. 2000 Apr;12(2):133-42. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/12.2.133. Int J Qual Health Care. 2000. PMID: 10830670 Review.

• Integrating clinical medicine and population health: where to from here?

  Rouble AN, Zayed R, Harvey BJ, Loh LC. Rouble AN, et al. Can J Public Health. 2019 Dec;110(6):801-804. doi: 10.17269/s41997-019-00194-4. Epub 2019 Feb 21. Can J Public Health. 2019. PMID: 30790222 Free PMC article.

• Measuring and improving cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening rates in a multi-site urban practice in Toronto, Canada.

  Feldman J, Davie S, Kiran T. Feldman J, et al. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2017 Apr 27;6(1):u213991.w5531. doi: 10.1136/bmjquality.u213991.w5531. eCollection 2017. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2017. PMID: 28469908 Free PMC article.

• Using self-reported data on the social determinants of health in primary care to identify cancer screening disparities: opportunities and challenges.

  Lofters AK, Schuler A, Slater M, Baxter NN, Persaud N, Pinto AD, Kucharski E, Davie S, Nisenbaum R, Kiran T. Lofters AK, et al. BMC Fam Pract. 2017 Feb 28;18(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s12875-017-0599-z. BMC Fam Pract. 2017. PMID: 28241787 Free PMC article.

• A population-based study evaluating family physicians' HIV experience and care of people living with HIV in Ontario.

  Kendall CE, Manuel DG, Younger J, Hogg W, Glazier RH, Taljaard M. Kendall CE, et al. Ann Fam Med. 2015 Sep;13(5):436-45. doi: 10.1370/afm.1822. Ann Fam Med. 2015. PMID: 26371264 Free PMC article.

• Impact assessment of a pay-for-performance program on breast cancer screening in France using micro data.

  Sicsic J, Franc C. Sicsic J, et al. Eur J Health Econ. 2017 Jun;18(5):609-621. doi: 10.1007/s10198-016-0813-2. Epub 2016 Jun 21. Eur J Health Econ. 2017. PMID: 27329654

1. 1. The National Commission on Physician Payment Reform. Report of the National Commission on Physician Payment Reform.Washington, DC; 2013
2. 1. The Commonwealth Fund. The Commonwealth Fund Health Care Opinion Leaders Survey: Assessing Health Care Experts’ Views on Health Care Costs. New York, NY: The Commonwealth Fund; 2005
3. 1. Cassel CK, Jain SH. Assessing individual physician performance: does measurement suppress motivation? JAMA. 2012;307(24):2595–2596 - PubMed
4. 1. Jha AK. Time to get serious about pay for performance. JAMA. 2013; 309(4):347–348 - PubMed
5. 1. Wodchis WP, Ross JS, Detsky AS. Is P4P really FFS? JAMA. 2007;298 (15):1797–1799 - PubMed

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.3