Awareness of, attitude toward, and willingness to participate in pay for performance programs among family physicians: a cross-sectional study.
Adult
Attitude of Health Personnel
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
National Health Programs
/ organization & administration
Needs Assessment
Physicians, Family
/ economics
Quality Improvement
/ organization & administration
Reimbursement, Incentive
Surveys and Questionnaires
Taiwan
Attitude
Awareness
Family physician
Pay-for-performance
Willingness
Journal
BMC family practice
ISSN: 1471-2296
Titre abrégé: BMC Fam Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967792
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 03 2020
30 03 2020
Historique:
received:
25
02
2019
accepted:
26
02
2020
entrez:
2
4
2020
pubmed:
2
4
2020
medline:
20
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The National Health Insurance Administration of Taiwan has introduced several pay-for-performance programs to improve the quality of healthcare. This study aimed to provide government with evidence-based research findings to help primary care physicians to actively engage in pay-for-performance programs. We conducted a questionnaire survey among family physicians with age-stratified sampling from September 2016 to December 2017. The structured questionnaire consisted of items including the basic demographics of the surveyee and their awareness of and attitudes toward the strengths and/or weaknesses of the pay-for-performance programs, as well as their subjective norms, and the willingness to participate in the pay-for-performance programs. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to compare the differences between family physicians who participate in the pay-for-performance programs versus those who did not. A total of 543 family physicians completed the questionnaire. Among family physicians who participated in the pay-for-performance programs, more had joined the Family Practice Integrated Care Project [Odds ratio (OR): 2.70; 95% Confidence interval (CI): 1.78 ~ 4.09], had a greater awareness of pay-for-performance programs (OR: 2.37; 95% CI: 1.50 ~ 3.83), and a less negative attitude to pay-for-performance programs (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.31 ~ 0.80) after adjusting for age and gender. The major reasons for family physicians who decided to join the pay-for-performance programs included believing the programs help enhance the quality of healthcare (80.8%) and recognizing the benefit of saving health expenditure (63.4%). The causes of unwillingness to join in a pay-for-performance program among non-participants were increased load of administrative works (79.6%) and inadequate understanding of the contents of the pay-for-performance programs (62.9%). To better motivate family physicians into P4P participation, hosting effective training programs, developing a more transparent formula for assessing financial risk, providing sufficient budget for healthcare quality improvement, and designing a reasonable profit-sharing plan to promote collaboration between different levels of medical institutions are all imperative.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The National Health Insurance Administration of Taiwan has introduced several pay-for-performance programs to improve the quality of healthcare. This study aimed to provide government with evidence-based research findings to help primary care physicians to actively engage in pay-for-performance programs.
METHODS
We conducted a questionnaire survey among family physicians with age-stratified sampling from September 2016 to December 2017. The structured questionnaire consisted of items including the basic demographics of the surveyee and their awareness of and attitudes toward the strengths and/or weaknesses of the pay-for-performance programs, as well as their subjective norms, and the willingness to participate in the pay-for-performance programs. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to compare the differences between family physicians who participate in the pay-for-performance programs versus those who did not.
RESULTS
A total of 543 family physicians completed the questionnaire. Among family physicians who participated in the pay-for-performance programs, more had joined the Family Practice Integrated Care Project [Odds ratio (OR): 2.70; 95% Confidence interval (CI): 1.78 ~ 4.09], had a greater awareness of pay-for-performance programs (OR: 2.37; 95% CI: 1.50 ~ 3.83), and a less negative attitude to pay-for-performance programs (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.31 ~ 0.80) after adjusting for age and gender. The major reasons for family physicians who decided to join the pay-for-performance programs included believing the programs help enhance the quality of healthcare (80.8%) and recognizing the benefit of saving health expenditure (63.4%). The causes of unwillingness to join in a pay-for-performance program among non-participants were increased load of administrative works (79.6%) and inadequate understanding of the contents of the pay-for-performance programs (62.9%).
CONCLUSIONS
To better motivate family physicians into P4P participation, hosting effective training programs, developing a more transparent formula for assessing financial risk, providing sufficient budget for healthcare quality improvement, and designing a reasonable profit-sharing plan to promote collaboration between different levels of medical institutions are all imperative.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32228473
doi: 10.1186/s12875-020-01118-9
pii: 10.1186/s12875-020-01118-9
pmc: PMC7106702
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
60Références
Ann Fam Med. 2012 Sep-Oct;10(5):461-8
pubmed: 22966110
Ann Fam Med. 2009 Mar-Apr;7(2):121-7
pubmed: 19273866
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988 Oct;56(5):754-61
pubmed: 3057010
Am J Manag Care. 2009 May;15(5):305-10
pubmed: 19435398
Fam Pract. 2018 Jul 23;35(4):352-357
pubmed: 29194539
Prev Med. 2016 Apr;85:53-9
pubmed: 26740347
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 12;11(8):e0161002
pubmed: 27517172
Popul Health Manag. 2009 Jun;12(3):121-9
pubmed: 19534576
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Apr;95(14):e3282
pubmed: 27057892
Int J Qual Health Care. 2005 Apr;17(2):141-6
pubmed: 15665066
Br J Gen Pract. 2013 Jun;63(611):e408-15
pubmed: 23735412
Health Policy. 2013 May;110(2-3):115-30
pubmed: 23380190
J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Feb;21 Suppl 2:S9-S13
pubmed: 16637965
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Feb 20;168(4):255-265
pubmed: 29181511
Health Policy. 2017 Apr;121(4):407-417
pubmed: 28189271
Ann Intern Med. 2017 Mar 7;166(5):341-353
pubmed: 28114600
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 26;367(4):292-5
pubmed: 22830460
N Engl J Med. 2004 Sep 30;351(14):1448-54
pubmed: 15459308
N Engl J Med. 2006 Nov 2;355(18):1845-7
pubmed: 17079757
J Prev Med Public Health. 2012 May;45(3):137-47
pubmed: 22712040
BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Jan 05;7:4
pubmed: 17207278
Health Serv Res. 2006 Oct;41(5):1959-78
pubmed: 16987311
Health Educ Q. 1988 Summer;15(2):175-83
pubmed: 3378902
N Engl J Med. 2009 Jul 23;361(4):368-78
pubmed: 19625717
Healthc (Amst). 2019 Mar;7(1):30-37
pubmed: 30197304
BMJ. 2016 Aug 04;354:i4058
pubmed: 27492822
BMC Health Serv Res. 2006 Dec 04;6:155
pubmed: 17144921
PLoS One. 2013 Sep 09;8(9):e72684
pubmed: 24039794
Am J Manag Care. 2009 Dec;15(10 Suppl):S300-5
pubmed: 20088634
Med Care. 2012 Feb;50(2):109-16
pubmed: 22249920