Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2017 Nov;127-128:42-55. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2017.06.001. Epub 2017 Aug 31.

[Pay for performance in dental care: A systematic narrative review of quality P4P models in dental care].

[Article in German]

Author information

1
Zentrum Zahnärztliche Qualität (ZZQ), Berlin, Deutschland. Electronic address: r.chenot@zzq-berlin.de.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Pay for performance (P4P) links reimbursement to the achievement of quality objectives. Experiences with P4P instruments and studies on their effects are available for the inpatient sector. A systematic narrative review brings together findings concerning the use and the effects of P4P, especially in dental care.

METHODS:

A systematic literature search in PubMed and the Cochrane Library for reimbursement models using quality indicators provided 77 publications. Inclusion criteria were: year of publication not older than 2007, dental sector, models of quality-oriented remuneration, quality of care, quality indicators. 27 publications met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated with regard to the instruments and effects of P4P. The database search was supplemented by a free search on the Internet as well as a search in indicator databases and portals. The results of the included studies were extracted and summarized narratively.

RESULTS:

27 studies were included in the review. Performance-oriented remuneration is an instrument of quality competition. In principle, P4P is embedded in an existing remuneration system, i.e., it does not occur in isolation. In the United States, England and Scandinavia, models are currently being tested for quality-oriented remuneration in dental care, based on quality indicators. The studies identified by the literature search are very heterogeneous and do not yield comparable endpoints. Difficulties are seen in the reproducibility of the quality of dental care with regard to certain characteristics which still have to be defined as quality-promoting properties. Risk selection cannot be ruled out, which may have an impact on structural quality (access to care, coordination).

CONCLUSION:

There were no long-term effects of P4P on the quality of care. In the short and medium term, adverse effects on the participants' motivation as well as shifting effects towards the private sector are described. A prerequisite for the functioning of P4P is the definition of clear targets and measuring parameters. Furthermore, evidence-based quality indicators have to be developed that validly depict quality differences. It is yet unknown whether P4P will have long-term effects or whether the quality of dental care will increase.

KEYWORDS:

Qualität; Qualitätsindikator; Qualitätsorientierte Vergütung; Review; Zahnärztliche Versorgung; dental care; pay for performance (P4P); quality; quality indicator; review

PMID:
28838794
DOI:
10.1016/j.zefq.2017.06.001
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center