Does pay-for-performance benefit patients with multiple chronic conditions? Evidence from a universal coverage health care system
Open Access
- 5 May 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Health Policy and Planning
- Vol. 31 (1), 83-90
- https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czv024
Abstract
Introduction: Numerous studies have examined the impact of pay-for-performance (P4P) programmes, yet little is known regarding their effects on continuity of care (COC) and the role of multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). This study aimed to examine the effects of a P4P programme for diabetes care on health care provision, COC and health care outcomes in diabetic patients with and without comorbid hypertension. Methods: This study utilized a large-scale natural experiment with a 4-year follow-up period under a compulsory universal health insurance programme in Taiwan. The intervention groups consisted of patients with diabetes who were enrolled in the P4P programme in 2005. The comparison groups were selected via propensity score matching with patients who were seen by the same group of physicians. A difference-in-differences analysis was conducted using generalized estimating equation models to examine the effects of the P4P programme. Results: Significant impacts were observed after the implementation of the P4P programme for diabetic patients with and without hypertension. The programme increased the number of necessary examinations/tests and improved the COC between patients and their physicians. The programme significantly reduced the likelihood of diabetes-related hospital admissions and emergency department visits [odds ratio (OR): 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63–0.80 for diabetic patients with hypertension; OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.64–0.86 for patients without hypertension]. However, the effects of the P4P programme diminished to some extent in the second year after its implementation. Conclusion: This study suggests that a financial incentive programme may improve the provision of necessary health care, COC and health care outcomes for diabetic patients both with and without comorbid hypertension. Health authorities could develop policies to increase participation in P4P programmes and encourage continued improvement in health care outcomes.Keywords
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- Economic evaluation of pay-for-performance in health care: a systematic reviewThe European Journal of Health Economics, 2011
- The Unintended Consequence of Diabetes Mellitus Pay‐for‐Performance (P4P) Program in Taiwan: Are Patients with More Comorbidities or More Severe Conditions Likely to Be Excluded from the P4P Program?Health Services Research, 2010
- Systematic review: Effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health careBMC Health Services Research, 2010
- Pay for perfomance and the quality of diabetes management in individuals with and without co-morbid medical conditionsJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2009
- Effects of Pay for Performance on the Quality of Primary Care in EnglandNew England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Lessons From Evaluations of Purchaser Pay-for-Performance ProgramsMedical Care Research and Review, 2008
- Chronic Illness with Complexity: Implications for Performance Measurement of Optimal Glycemic ControlJournal of General Internal Medicine, 2007
- Clinical Practice Guidelines and Quality of Care for Older Patients With Multiple Comorbid DiseasesJAMA, 2005
- Putting Smart Money to Work for Quality ImprovementHealth Services Research, 2005
- The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effectsBiometrika, 1983