title: Effect of pay-for-performance incentives on quality of care in small practices with electronic health records: a randomized trial.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Most evaluations of pay-for-performance (P4P) incentives have focused on large-group practices. Thus, the effect of P4P in small practices, where many US residents receive care, is largely unknown. Furthermore, whether electronic health records (EHRs) with chronic disease management capabilities support small-practice response to P4P has not been studied.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To assess the effect of P4P incentives on quality in EHR-enabled small practices in the context of an established quality improvement initiative.
  
  
  METHODS
  A cluster-randomized trial of small (<10 clinicians) primary care clinics in New York City from April 2009 through March 2010. A city program provided all participating clinics with the same EHR software with decision support and patient registry functionalities and quality improvement specialists offering technical assistance.
  
  
  METHODS
  Incentivized clinics were paid for each patient whose care met the performance criteria, but they received higher payments for patients with comorbidities, who had Medicaid insurance, or who were uninsured (maximum payments: $200/patient; $100,000/clinic). Quality reports were given quarterly to both the intervention and control groups.
  
  
  METHODS
  Comparison of differences in performance improvement, from the beginning to the end of the study, between control and intervention clinics for aspirin or antithrombotic prescription, blood pressure control, cholesterol control, and smoking cessation interventions. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to account for clustering of patients within clinics, with a treatment by time interaction term assessing the statistical significance of the effect of the intervention.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Participating clinics (n = 42 for each group) had similar baseline characteristics, with a mean of 4592 (median, 2500) patients at the intervention group clinics and 3042 (median, 2000) at the control group clinics. Intervention clinics had greater adjusted absolute improvement in rates of appropriate antithrombotic prescription (12.0% vs 6.1%, difference: 6.0% [95% CI, 2.2% to 9.7%], P = .001 for interaction term), blood pressure control (no comorbidities: 9.7% vs 4.3%, difference: 5.5% [95% CI, 1.6% to 9.3%], P = .01 for interaction term; with diabetes mellitus: 9.0% vs 1.2%, difference: 7.8% [95% CI, 3.2% to 12.4%], P = .007 for interaction term; with diabetes mellitus or ischemic vascular disease: 9.5% vs 1.7%, difference: 7.8% [95% CI, 3.0% to 12.6%], P = .01 for interaction term), and in smoking cessation interventions (12.4% vs 7.7%, difference: 4.7% [95% CI, -0.3% to 9.6%], P = .02 for interaction term). Intervention clinics performed better on all measures for Medicaid and uninsured patients except cholesterol control, but no differences were statistically significant.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Among small EHR-enabled clinics, a P4P incentive program compared with usual care resulted in modest improvements in cardiovascular care processes and outcomes. Because most proposed P4P programs are intended to remain in place more than a year, further research is needed to determine whether this effect increases or decreases over time.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00884013.
authors.affiliation: Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco, USA. bardachn@peds.ucsf.edu
authors.forename: Naomi S
authors.initials: NS
authors.lastname: Bardach
authors.forename: Jason J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Samantha F
authors.initials: SF
authors.lastname: De Leon
authors.forename: Sarah C
authors.initials: SC
authors.lastname: Shih
authors.forename: W John
authors.initials: WJ
authors.lastname: Boscardin
authors.forename: L Elizabeth
authors.initials: LE
authors.lastname: Goldman
authors.forename: R Adams
authors.initials: RA
authors.lastname: Dudley
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D002318:Cardiovascular Diseases / Q000517:prevention & control / Q000628:therapy; D002908:Chronic Disease / Q000628:therapy*; D019468:Disease Management; D057286:Electronic Health Records / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005260:Female; D006123:Group Practice / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006801:Humans; D006973:Hypertension / Q000517:prevention & control / Q000628:therapy; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009519:New York City; D010818:Practice Patterns, Physicians'; D011320:Primary Health Care; D058996:Quality Improvement; D012042:Registries; D012052:Reimbursement, Incentive; D016540:Smoking Cessation
references.citation: JAMA. 2002 Sep 25;288(12):1484-90
references.pmid: 12243635
references.citation: Health Serv Res. 2010 Apr;45(2):553-64
references.pmid: 20059568
references.citation: Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 Mar-Apr;28(2):345-56
references.pmid: 19275989
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 1999 Oct 7;341(15):1147-50
references.pmid: 10511617
references.citation: JAMA. 2006 Dec 13;296(22):2694-702
references.pmid: 17164455
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2012 Dec 18;157(12):889-99
references.pmid: 23247940
references.citation: Hypertension. 2006 Mar;47(3):345-51
references.pmid: 16432045
references.citation: J Gen Intern Med. 2007 Jun;22(6):872-6
references.pmid: 17443360
references.citation: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Sep 07;(9):CD008451
references.pmid: 21901722
references.citation: BMJ. 2012 Aug 13;345:e5015
references.pmid: 22893567
references.citation: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011 May 1;18(3):271-5
references.pmid: 21486885
references.citation: Arch Intern Med. 2008 Oct 13;168(18):1993-9
references.pmid: 18852400
references.citation: J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Jul-Aug;19(4):604-9
references.pmid: 22249967
references.citation: Health Policy. 2007 Jan;80(1):179-93
references.pmid: 16624440
references.citation: JAMA. 2007 Feb 21;297(7):740-4
references.pmid: 17312294
references.citation: JAMA. 2008 May 14;299(18):2180-7
references.pmid: 18477785
references.citation: Prev Med. 2003 Mar;36(3):291-9
references.pmid: 12634020
references.citation: JAMA. 2005 Jul 20;294(3):309-17
references.pmid: 16030275
references.citation: BMJ. 1998 Apr 18;316(7139):1236-8
references.pmid: 9553006
references.citation: Am J Manag Care. 2010 Feb 01;16(2):e35-42
references.pmid: 20148608
references.citation: BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Aug 23;10:247
references.pmid: 20731816
references.citation: JAMA. 2006 Jul 5;296(1):72-8
references.pmid: 16820549
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2005 Jan 6;352(1):20-8
references.pmid: 15635109
references.citation: Health Aff (Millwood). 2005 Nov-Dec;24(6):1543-8
references.pmid: 16284026
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2011 Sep 30;11:753
references.pmid: 21962009
references.citation: Rand J Econ. 2010 Spring;41(1):64-91
references.pmid: 21667575
references.citation: Health Policy. 2013 May;110(2-3):115-30
references.pmid: 23380190
references.citation: BMJ. 2002 May 25;324(7348):1271-3
references.pmid: 12028986
references.citation: BMJ. 1998 Sep 12;317(7160):703-13
references.pmid: 9732337