Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 8, 2026
Using Visual and Narrative Methods to Achieve Fair Process in Clinical Care
Published on: February 16, 2011
The Effects of Pay-for-Performance Programs on Health, Health Care Use, and Processes of Care: A Systematic Review
Aaron Mendelson1, Karli Kondo1, Cheryl Damberg1
1From VA Portland Health Care System, and Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, and RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California.
Background:
The benefits of pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are uncertain.
Purpose:
To update and expand a prior review examining the effects of P4P programs targeted at the physician, group, managerial, or institutional level on process-of-care and patient outcomes in ambulatory and inpatient settings.
Data Sources:
PubMed from June 2007 to October 2016; MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Business Economics and Theory, Business Source Elite, Scopus, Faculty of 1000, and Gartner Research from June 2007 to February 2016.
Study Selection:
Trials and observational studies in ambulatory and inpatient settings reporting process-of-care, health, or utilization outcomes.
Data Extraction:
Two investigators extracted data, assessed study quality, and graded the strength of the evidence.
Data Synthesis:
Among 69 studies, 58 were in ambulatory settings, 52 reported process-of-care outcomes, and 38 reported patient outcomes. Low-strength evidence suggested that P4P programs in ambulatory settings may improve process-of-care outcomes over the short term (2 to 3 years), whereas data on longer-term effects were limited. Many of the positive studies were conducted in the United Kingdom, where incentives were larger than in the United States. The largest improvements were seen in areas where baseline performance was poor. There was no consistent effect of P4P on intermediate health outcomes (low-strength evidence) and insufficient evidence to characterize any effect on patient health outcomes. In the hospital setting, there was low-strength evidence that P4P had little or no effect on patient health outcomes and a positive effect on reducing hospital readmissions.
Limitation:
Few methodologically rigorous studies; heterogeneous population and program characteristics and incentive targets.
Conclusion:
Pay-for-performance programs may be associated with improved processes of care in ambulatory settings, but consistently positive associations with improved health outcomes have not been demonstrated in any setting.
Primary Funding Source:
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
Related Concept Videos
01:29Issues And Trends In Healthcare Delivery System
Cost Containment
Payment for healthcare services has historically promoted adoption of costly and often unnecessary or inefficient...
01:30Health Information Technology and Healthcare Information System
Health Information Technology, commonly called HIT, integrates advanced information systems and technology in healthcare settings. Its primary functions include:
01:18Introduction To Health Care Delivery System
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) advocates for a patient-centered, effective, safe, timely, equitable, and effective healthcare system. The National Priorities...
01:19Standards of Care II
01:15Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
01:13Patient-centered Care