Abstract
The use of incentives to improve quality of care is spreading rapidly across the health care system. Public reporting (PR) and pay-for-performance (PFP) are two examples of incentive-based programs. Although conclusive level I evidence for the positive impacts of these PR and PFP is limited, individual states and the federal government have begun to adopt and pilot these programs for a variety of specific clinical conditions. This article reviews the principles of health care quality performance measurement; current reporting and pay-for-performance programs; and the most recent literature documenting positive, negative and future impacts of these types of programs on urologic practice.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 37-48 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Urologic Clinics of North America |
| Volume | 36 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Feb 2009 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:Dr. Dudley's work on this article was funded by a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Investigator Award in Health Policy.
Copyright:
Copyright 2009 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
Keywords
- Health care quality improvement
- Pay-for-performance
- Performance measurement
- Public reporting
- Urology