'No-Pay' Policy for HAIs Does Not Reduce Infections
"For example," they wrote, "despite widespread adoption for pay-for-performance programs by health plans over the past decade, the evidence that they improve patient outcomes, either in primary care settings or hospital settings, is mixed.
Furthermore, the implementation of pay-for-performance programs has not been shown to be efficient or cost-effective."
Additionally "lingering concerns" remain that such penalties, more likely when providers take care of sicker patients, "may lead providers to avoid the most seriously ill patients, which may mitigate any intended beneficial effect of these programs."
Cheryl Clark is senior quality editor and California correspondent for HealthLeaders Media. She is a member of the Association of Health Care Journalists.
- Medical Errors Third Leading Cause of Death, Senators Told
- Chronic Disease Care Costs Get Bipartisan Attention
- As States Regulate Provider Competition, Common Threads Emerge
- 4 Tectonic Shifts Shaking Up Healthcare
- Mayo Tops U.S. News Best Hospitals Rankings
- CareFirst Announces PCMH Program Results
- Hospitals Seeking to Understand PPACA Impact Turn to Data
- The case for concierge medicine
- Telemedicine Providers Welcome AMA Guidelines
- HSAs: What About the Fees?