Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Urol Clin North Am. 2009 Feb;36(1):37-48, vi. doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2008.08.003.

Performance measurement, public reporting, and pay-for-performance.

Author information

1
Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.

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.

PMID:
19038634
DOI:
10.1016/j.ucl.2008.08.003
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center