Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pay for performance: Is it the best way to improve control of hypertension?

  • Published:
Current Hypertension Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pay-for-performance schemes provide financial incentives to health care providers for achieving specified performance targets, and therefore seek to explicitly link physician pay to the quality of care provided for patients. This article provides an overview of the essential elements of pay-for-performance schemes and how these relate to the treatment of hypertension. It also reviews the evidence for the effectiveness of pay-for-performance schemes and analyzes new data from a program in the United Kingdom that provides financial incentives for family practitioners caring for 6 million hypertensive patients. Although several pay-for-performance schemes have proved effective at improving quality of care, few to date have addressed patients with hypertension. Findings from the UK pay-for-performance scheme suggest that generous financial incentives are associated with high levels of achievement for aspects of care for hypertensive patients, but much of this achievement may be attributable to other quality improvement initiatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Schuster M, McGlynn E, Brook R: How good is the quality of health care in the United States? Milbank Q 1998, 76:517–563.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Seddon M, Marshall M, Campbell S, Roland M: Systematic review of quality of clinical care in general practice in the UK, Australia and New Zealand. Qual Health Care 2001, 10:152–158.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hajjar I, Kotchen T: Trends in prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in the United States, 1988–2000, JAMA 2003, 290:199–206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Department of Health: Health Survey for England 2003. London: The Stationery Office; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brown M, Cruickshank J, Dominiczak A, et al.: Executive Committee, British Hypertension Society. Better blood pressure control: how to combine drugs. J Hum Hypertens 2003, 17:81–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. National Committee for Quality Assurance: The State of Managed Care Quality. Washington, DC: NCQA; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  7. National Committee for Quality Assurance: The State of Health Care Quality 2006. Washington, DC: NCQA; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Institute of Medicine: Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Oxman A, Thomson M, Davis D, Haynes R: No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. CMAJ 1995, 153:1423–1431.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Leatherman S, Sutherland K, eds.: The Quest for Quality in the NHS. London: Nuffield Trust and Her Majesty’s Stationery Office; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Campbell S, Roland M, Middleton E, Reeves D: Improvements in quality of clinical care in English general practice 1998–2003: longitudinal observational study. BMJ 2005, 331:1121–1123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Weingarten S, Henning J, Badamgarav E, et al: Interventions used in disease management programmes for patients with chronic illness—which ones work? Meta-analysis of published reports. BMJ 2002, 325:925–928.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Onysko J, Maxwell C, Eliasziw M, et al.: Large increases in hypertension diagnosis and treatment in Canada after a healthcare professional education program. Hypertension 2006, 48:853–860.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Walsh J, McDonald K, Shojania K, et al.: Quality improvement strategies for hypertension management. A systematic review. Medical Care 2006, 44:646–657.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fahey T, Schroeder K, Ebrahim S: Interventions used to improve control of blood pressure in patients with hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005:CD005182.

  16. Fretheim A, Oxman AD, Håvelsrud K, et al.: Rational Prescribing in Primary Care (RaPP): A cluster randomized trial of a tailored intervention to improve prescribing of antihypertensive and cholesterol-lowering drugs. PLoS Med 2006, 3:e134.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Primatesta P, Poulter N: Improvement in hypertension management in England: results from the Health Survey for England 2003. J Hypertens 2006, 24:1187–1192.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Institute of Medicine: Rewarding Provider Performance: Aligning Incentives in Medicare. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Chaix-Couturier C, Durand-Zaleski I, Jolly D, Durieux P: Effects of financial incentives on medical practice: results from a systematic review of the literature and methodological issues. Int J Qual Health Care 2000, 12:133–142.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. The Leapfrog Group: Available at: http://www.leapfroggroup.org. Accessed February 22, 2007.

  21. Kaplan N: Clinical trials for hypertension: expectations fulfilled and unfulfilled. Hypertension 2007, 49:257–259.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Epstein A: Pay for performance at the tipping point. N Engl J Med 2007, 356:515–517.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Medicare Australia; Practice incentives program. Available at: http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/providers/incentives_allowances/pip.shtml. Accessed March 31, 2007.

  24. Pink G, Brown A, Studer M, et al.: Pay for performance in publicly financed healthcare: some international experience and considerations for Canada. Healthcare Papers 2006, 6:9–26.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Greb S, Focke A, Hessel F, Wasem J: Financial incentives for disease management programmes and integrated care in German social health insurance. Health Policy 2006, 78:295–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Custers T, Arah O, Klazinga N: Is there a business case for quality in The Netherlands? A critical analysis of the recent reforms of the health care system. Health Policy 2007, 82:226–239.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Perkins R, Seddon M, Effective Practice Informatics and Quality (EPIQ): Quality improvement in New Zealand healthcare. Part 5: measurement for monitoring and controlling performance—the quest for external accountability. N Z Med J 2006, 119:U2149.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ): National Quality Measures Clearinghouse. Available at: http://www.qualitymeasures.ahrq.gov. Accessed May 9, 2007.

  29. Roland M: Linking physician pay to quality of care—a major experiment in the United Kingdom. N Engl J Med 2004, 351:1448–1454.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7). Bethesda, MD: NIH, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Williams B, Poulter N, Brown M, et al.: British Hypertension Society guidelines for hypertension management 2004 (BHS-IV): summary. BMJ 2004, 328:634–640.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Petersen L, Woodard L, Urech T, et al.: Does pay-for-performance improve the quality of health care? Ann Intern Med 2006, 145:265–272.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Landon B, Hicks L, O’Malley A, et al.: Improving the management of chronic disease at community health centers. N Engl J Med 2007, 356:921–934.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Beaulieu N, Horrigan D: Putting smart money to work for quality improvement. Health Serv Res 2005, 40:1318–1334.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rosenthal M, Frank R, Li Z, Epstein A: Early experience with pay-or-performance: from concept to practice. JAMA 2005, 294:1788–1793.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Schultz J, O’Connell J, McDonough K, et al.: Determinants of compliance statin therapy and low-density lipoprotein goal attainment in a managed care population. Am J Manag Care 2005, 11:306–312.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Shen Y: Selection incentives in a performance-based contracting system. Health Serv Res 2003, 38:535–552.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Grady K, Lemkau J, Lee N, Caddell C: Enhancing mammography referral in primary care. Prev Med 1997, 26:791–800.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Kouides R, Bennett N, Lewis B, et al.: Performance-based physician reimbursement and influenza immunization rates in the elderly. The primary care physicians of Monroe County. Am J Prev Med 1998, 14:89–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Hillman A, Ripley K, Goldfarb N, et al.: The use of physician financial incentives and feedback to improve pediatric preventive care in Medicaid managed care. Pediatrics 1999, 104:931–935.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Roski J, Jeddeloh R, An L, et al.: The impact of financial incentives and a patient registry on preventive care quality: increasing provider adherence to evidence-based smoking cessation practice guidelines. Prev Med 2003, 36:291–299.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Guthrie B, McLean G, Sutton M, Workload and reward in the Quality and Outcomes Framework of the 2004 general practice contract. Br J Gen Pract 2006, 56:836–841.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Doran T, Fullwood C, Gravelle H, et al.: Pay-for-performance programs in family practices in the United Kingdom. N Engl J Med 2006, 355:375–384.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. MedVantage Pay for Performance. Available at: http://www.medvantage.com. Accessed February 10, 2007.

  45. Integrated Healthcare Association: Available at: http://www.iha.org. Accessed January 12, 2007.

  46. Bridges to Excellence: Available at: http://www.bridgestoexcellence.org. Accessed May 3, 2007.

  47. De Brantes F: Pay for performance and beyond: a recipe for improving healthcare. Available at: http://www.bridgestoexcellence.org/assets/Documents/P4PandBeyondarticlebyFSB.pdf. Accessed April 24, 2007.

  48. Bridges to Excellence: BTE program evaluation, 2006. Available at: http://www.bridgestoexcellence.org/assets/Documents/Program_Evaluation_Documents/BTE-Program-Evaluation-7-26-06.pdf. Accessed February 21, 2007.

  49. National Health Service Information Centre for Health and Social Care: Available at: http://www.ic.nhs.uk. Accessed May 3, 2007.

  50. Campbell S, Reeves D, Kontopantelis E, et al.: Quality of primary care in England with the introduction of pay for performance. N Engl J Med 2007, 351:181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK

    Tim Doran

Authors
  1. Tim Doran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catherine Fullwood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tim Doran.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Doran, T., Fullwood, C. Pay for performance: Is it the best way to improve control of hypertension?. Current Science Inc 9, 360–367 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906-007-0067-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906-007-0067-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation