Quality and pay for performance

The value of the medical services a patient receives is subjective because it is difficult to measure within the existing healthcare system. For example, should a doctor or hospital get high marks — and higher payment — for performing a number of successful surgeries? Or, should one be recognized and rewarded for preventing the need for surgery in the first place or identifying non-surgical procedures based on best practices?

As healthcare costs continue to rise, interest has risen in tying payment to performance. The rush to measure the quality of the clinicians, treatments and facilities has resulted in thousands of proposed metrics and enormous confusion. The process of developing performance metrics and tying them to financial incentives continues to evolve, and will continue to have a significant impact on providers, payers, and patients.

Papers:

• Doing more with less: How can healthcare providers cut IT costs in today's economic climate?
• Rock and a hard place: An analysis of the $36 billion impact from health IT stimulus funding
• Top nine health industry issues in 2009
• Proposals to policy: A national conversation on healthcare reform
• Healthcare policy in an Obama administration: Delivering on the promise of universal coverage
• You get what you pay for: A global look at balancing demand, quality, and efficiency in healthcare payment reform
• Behind the numbers: Medical cost trends for 2009
• The price of excess: Identifying waste in healthcare spending
• Paying for performance: Incentives and the English health system
• Keeping score: A comparison of pay-for-performance programs among health plans
• The quality conundrum: Practical approaches for enhancing patient care