The implications of “pay-for-performance” reimbursement for Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery

Objective: To introduce otolaryngologists to outcomes-linked reimbursement ( pay-for-performance ), identify clinical practice implications and recommend changes for successful transition from the traditional pay-for-effort reimbursement model. Study design: Policy review Results: Payers are actively linking reimbursement to quality. Since the Institute of Medicine issued its report on medical errors in 1999, there has been much public and private concern over patient safety. In an effort to base health care payment on quality, pay-for-performance programs reward or penalize hospitals and physicians for their ability to maintain standards of care established by payers and regulatory groups. More than 100 such programs are operational in the United States today. This reimbursement model relies on detailed documentation in specific patient care areas to facilitate evaluation of outcomes for purposes of determining reimbursement. Since performance criteria for reimbursement have not yet been proposed within Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, otolaryngologists must be involved to ensure the adoption of reasonable goals and development of reasonable systems for documentation. Conclusion: Pay-for-performance reimbursement is increasingly common in the current era of outcomes-based medicine. It will assume an even greater role over the next 3 years and will directly affect most otolaryngologists

Scaling up cervical cancer screening in the midst of human papillomavirus vaccination advocacy in Thailand

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Screening tests for cervical cancer are effective in reducing the disease burden. In Thailand, a Pap smear program has been implemented throughout the country for 40 years. In 2008 the Ministry of Public Health (MoPH) unexpectedly decided to scale up the coverage of free cervical cancer screening services, to meet an ambitious target. This study analyzes the processes and factors that drove this policy innovation in the area of cervical cancer control in Thailand.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In-depth interviews with key policy actors and review of relevant documents were conducted in 2009. Data analysis was guided by a framework, developed on public policy models and existing literature on scaling-up health care interventions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Between 2006 and 2008 international organizations and the vaccine industry advocated the introduction of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for the primary prevention of cervical cancer. Meanwhile, a local study suggested that the vaccine was considerably less cost-effective than cervical cancer screening in the Thai context. Then, from August to December 2008, the MoPH carried out a campaign to expand the coverage of its cervical cancer screening program, targeting one million women. The study reveals that several factors were influential in focusing the attention of policymakers on strengthening the screening services. These included the high burden of cervical cancer in Thailand, the launch of the HPV vaccine onto the global and domestic markets, the country’s political instability, and the dissemination of scientific evidence regarding the appropriateness of different options for cervical cancer prevention. Influenced by the country’s political crisis, the MoPH’s campaign was devised in a very short time. In the view of the responsible health officials, the campaign was not successful and indeed, did not achieve its ambitious target.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The Thai case study suggests that the political crisis was a crucial factor that drew the attention of policymakers to the cervical cancer problem and led the government to adopt a policy of expanding coverage of screening services. At the same time, the instability in the political system impeded the scaling up process, as it constrained the formulation and implementation of the policy in the later phase.</p

Care management for Type 2 diabetes in the United States: a systematic review and meta-analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This systematic review and meta-analysis aims at assessing the composition and performance of care management models evaluated in the last decade and their impact on patient important outcomes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A comprehensive literature search of electronic bibliographic databases was performed to identify care management trials in type 2 diabetes. Random effects meta-analysis was used when feasible to pool outcome measures.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fifty-two studies were eligible. Most commonly reported were surrogate outcomes (such as HbA1c and LDL), followed by process measures (clinic visit or testing frequency). Less frequently reported were quality of life, patient satisfaction, self-care, and healthcare utilization. Most care management modalities were carved out from primary care. Meta-analysis demonstrated a statistically significant but trivial reduction of HbA1c (weighted difference in means -0.21%, 95% confidence interval -0.40 to -0.03, p < .03) and LDL-cholesterol (weighted difference in means -3.38 mg/dL, 95% confidence interval -6.27 to -0.49, p < .02).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Most care management programs for patients with type 2 diabetes are 'carved-out', accomplish limited effects on metabolic outcomes, and have unknown effects on patient important outcomes. Comparative effectiveness research of different models of care management is needed to inform the design of medical homes for patients with chronic conditions.</p

Do the Institute of Medicines’ (IOM) dimensions of quality capture the current meaning of quality in health care? – An integrative review

Aims.The aim of this study was to determine whether the widely adopted Institute of Medicine&rsquo;s dimensions of quality capture the current meaning of quality in health care literature. Design. An integrative review was utilised as there has been a multitude of published papers defining quality in relation to health care, therefore collective analysis may provide new insight and understanding. Method. Papers offering a definition or conceptual understanding of quality in relation to health care were identified by searching relevant databases. Papers were excluded according to predefined criteria. An integrative review was conducted and the Institute of Medicine&rsquo;s dimensions were used as a framework for data extraction and analysis. Findings. The review identified two important additional dimensions of quality; namely caring and navigating the health care system and argues that they require recognition as dimensions in their own right. Conclusion. In the current climate of constrained finances there is a risk that the allocation of resources is directed to current explicit dimensions to the detriment of others. The result may be a reduction in health care quality, rather than improvement