Doubts about pay-for-performance in healthcare
While health spending in the United States far surpasses that in other industrialized nations, the quality of care in the US is no better overall, and on several measures it is worse. This stark fact has led to a wave of payment reforms that shift from rewarding volume (as fee for service does) to rewarding quality and efficiency. Such pay-for-performance schemes seem to be common sense and are now widely used by private payers and Medicare. But astonishingly, there's little evidence that they actually improve quality. What do we really know about the effectiveness of using financial incentives to improve quality and reduce costs in health care?
- Readmissions: No Quick Fix to Costly Hospital Challenge
- How Top-Ranked MA Plans Earn Their Stars
- 4 Ways to Lower the Cost to Collect from Self-Pay Patients
- House Calls Key to Pioneer ACO Success
- How Telehealth Pays Off for Providers, Patients
- How Hospitals Can Become 'Upstreamists'
- 4 Tips for Managing Employed Physicians
- Defensive Medicine Still Prevalent Despite Tort Reform
- 'Overtreatment' Debate Circles Back to Lung Cancer Screening
- Ebola: Health Officials Try to Quell Front Line Fears