Design, rationale, and baseline characteristics of a cluster randomized controlled trial of pay for performance for hypertension treatment: study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite compelling evidence of the benefits of treatment and well-accepted guidelines for treatment, hypertension is controlled in less than one-half of United States citizens.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>This randomized controlled trial tests whether explicit financial incentives promote the translation of guideline-recommended care for hypertension into clinical practice and improve blood pressure (BP) control in the primary care setting. Using constrained randomization, we assigned 12 Veterans Affairs hospital outpatient clinics to four study arms: physician-level incentive; group-level incentive; combination of physician and group incentives; and no incentives (control). All participants at the hospital (cluster) were assigned to the same study arm. We enrolled 83 full-time primary care physicians and 42 non-physician personnel. The intervention consisted of an educational session about guideline-recommended care for hypertension, five audit and feedback reports, and five disbursements of incentive payments. Incentive payments rewarded participants for chart-documented use of guideline-recommended antihypertensive medications, BP control, and appropriate responses to uncontrolled BP during a prior four-month performance period over the 20-month intervention. To identify potential unintended consequences of the incentives, the study team interviewed study participants, as well as non-participant primary care personnel and leadership at study sites. Chart reviews included data collection on quality measures not related to hypertension. To evaluate the persistence of the effect of the incentives, the study design includes a washout period.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>We briefly describe the rationale for the interventions being studied, as well as the major design choices. Rigorous research designs such as the one described here are necessary to determine whether performance-based payment arrangements such as financial incentives result in meaningful quality improvements.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov</url><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00302718">NCT00302718</a></p

Characteristics of specialists treating hypothyroid patients: the “THESIS” collaborative

Copyright \ua9 2023 Žarković, Attanasio, Nagy, Negro, Papini, Perros, Cohen, Akarsu, Alevizaki, Ayvaz, Bednarczuk, Berta, Bodor, Borissova, Boyanov, Buffet, Burlacu, Ćirić, D\uedez, Dobnig, Fadeyev, Field, Fliers, Fr\uf8lich, F\ufchrer, Galofr\ue9, Hakala, Jiskra, Kopp, Krebs, Kršek, Kužma, Lantz, Laz\ufarov\ue1, Leenhardt, Luchytskiy, McGowan, Melo, Metso, Moran, Morgunova, Mykola, Beleslin, Niculescu, Perić, Planck, Poiana, Puga, Robenshtok, Rosselet, Ruchala, Riis, Shepelkevich, Unuane, Vardarli, Visser, Vrionidou, Younes, Yurenya and Heged\ufcs.Introduction: Thyroid specialists influence how hypothyroid patients are treated, including patients managed in primary care. Given that physician characteristics influence patient care, this study aimed to explore thyroid specialist profiles and associations with geo-economic factors. Methods: Thyroid specialists from 28 countries were invited to respond to a questionnaire, Treatment of Hypothyroidism in Europe by Specialists: an International Survey (THESIS). Geographic regions were defined according to the United Nations Statistics Division. The national economic status was estimated using World Bank data on the gross national income per capita (GNI per capita). Results: 5,695 valid responses were received (response rate 33\ub70%). The mean age was 49 years, and 65\ub70% were female. The proportion of female respondents was lowest in Northern (45\ub76%) and highest in Eastern Europe (77\ub72%) (p &lt;0\ub7001). Respondent work volume, university affiliation and private practice differed significantly between countries (p&lt;0\ub7001). Age and GNI per capita were correlated inversely with the proportion of female respondents (p&lt;0\ub701). GNI per capita was inversely related to the proportion of respondents working exclusively in private practice (p&lt;0\ub7011) and the proportion of respondents who treated &gt;100 patients annually (p&lt;0\ub701). Discussion: THESIS has demonstrated differences in characteristics of thyroid specialists at national and regional levels, strongly associated with GNI per capita. Hypothyroid patients in middle-income countries are more likely to encounter female thyroid specialists working in private practice, with a high workload, compared to high-income countries. Whether these differences influence the quality of care and patient satisfaction is unknown, but merits further study

Systematic review: Effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pay-for-performance (P4P) is one of the primary tools used to support healthcare delivery reform. Substantial heterogeneity exists in the development and implementation of P4P in health care and its effects. This paper summarizes evidence, obtained from studies published between January 1990 and July 2009, concerning P4P effects, as well as evidence on the impact of design choices and contextual mediators on these effects. Effect domains include clinical effectiveness, access and equity, coordination and continuity, patient-centeredness, and cost-effectiveness.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The systematic review made use of electronic database searching, reference screening, forward citation tracking and expert consultation. The following databases were searched: Cochrane Library, EconLit, Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, and Web of Science. Studies that evaluate P4P effects in primary care or acute hospital care medicine were included. Papers concerning other target groups or settings, having no empirical evaluation design or not complying with the P4P definition were excluded. According to study design nine validated quality appraisal tools and reporting statements were applied. Data were extracted and summarized into evidence tables independently by two reviewers.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>One hundred twenty-eight evaluation studies provide a large body of evidence -to be interpreted with caution- concerning the effects of P4P on clinical effectiveness and equity of care. However, less evidence on the impact on coordination, continuity, patient-centeredness and cost-effectiveness was found. P4P effects can be judged to be encouraging or disappointing, depending on the primary mission of the P4P program: supporting minimal quality standards and/or boosting quality improvement. Moreover, the effects of P4P interventions varied according to design choices and characteristics of the context in which it was introduced.</p> <p>Future P4P programs should (1) select and define P4P targets on the basis of baseline room for improvement, (2) make use of process and (intermediary) outcome indicators as target measures, (3) involve stakeholders and communicate information about the programs thoroughly and directly, (4) implement a uniform P4P design across payers, (5) focus on both quality improvement and achievement, and (6) distribute incentives to the individual and/or team level.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>P4P programs result in the full spectrum of possible effects for specific targets, from absent or negligible to strongly beneficial. Based on the evidence the review has provided further indications on how effect findings are likely to relate to P4P design choices and context. The provided best practice hypotheses should be tested in future research.</p

Polygenic risk and hazard scores for Alzheimer's disease prediction

OBJECTIVE: Genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) have identified over 30 susceptibility loci associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Using AD GWAS data from the International Genomics of Alzheimer's Project (IGAP), Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) was successfully applied to predict life time risk of AD development. A recently introduced Polygenic Hazard Score (PHS) is able to quantify individuals with age‐specific genetic risk for AD. The aim of this study was to quantify the age‐specific genetic risk for AD with PRS and compare the results generated by PRS with those from PHS. // METHODS: Quantification of individual differences in age‐specific genetic risk for AD identified by the PRS, was performed with Cox Regression on 9903 (2626 cases and 7277 controls) individuals from the Genetic and Environmental Risk in Alzheimer's Disease consortium (GERAD). Polygenic Hazard Scores were generated for the same individuals. The age‐specific genetic risk for AD identified by the PRS was compared with that generated by the PHS. This was repeated using varying SNPs P‐value thresholds for disease association. // RESULTS: Polygenic Risk Score significantly predicted the risk associated with age at AD onset when SNPs were preselected for association to AD at P ≤ 0.001. The strongest effect (B = 0.28, SE = 0.04, P = 2.5 × 10−12) was observed for PRS based upon genome‐wide significant SNPs (P ≤ 5 × 10−8). The strength of association was weaker with less stringent SNP selection thresholds. // INTERPRETATION: Both PRS and PHS can be used to predict an age‐specific risk for developing AD. The PHS approach uses SNP effect sizes derived with the Cox Proportional Hazard Regression model. When SNPs were selected based upon AD GWAS case/control P ≤ 10−3, we found no advantage of using SNP effects sizes calculated with the Cox Proportional Hazard Regression model in our study. When SNPs are selected for association with AD risk at P > 10−3, the age‐specific risk prediction results are not significant for either PRS or PHS. However PHS could be more advantageous than PRS of age specific AD risk predictions when SNPs are prioritized for association with AD age at onset (i.e., powerful Cox Regression GWAS study)