Achieving better quality care in general practice: are incentives the answer?

BACKGROUND

The introduction of financial incentives, such as the quality and outcomes framework (QOF), historically lead to improvements in standardising practice. However, with shifting demands on healthcare providers, are these schemes still enough to drive high-quality care?

AIM

To explore current incentives, intrinsic and extrinsic, their role and effectiveness in improving quality of care and how they are perceived by GPs.

METHOD

Mixed methods study using two systematic literature reviews including 44 papers and 18 semi-structured interviews with GPs.

RESULTS

In the literature, QOF was associated with reduced socioeconomic inequalities, decreased mortality and improved outcomes. However, the absence of control groups and the simultaneous analysis of multiple indicators complicates the findings. GPs agreed with the literature and viewed financial incentives as beneficial, however, they felt the key driver in providing good-quality care was their intrinsic motivation. Financial incentives were found to contribute to depersonalised care, diluted provision of non-incentivised activities and hindered overall practice. The results from the second literature review were in keeping with the views of the participants. They illustrated the importance of managing factors contributing to physician burnout, reduced performance, and low job satisfaction, which can result in the provision of low-quality care.

CONCLUSION

Financial incentives have the potential to induce behaviour change, however, their use in quality improvement is limited when used alone. If used in an environment that nurtures intrinsic motivation, healthcare providers will be more driven to achieve a higher quality of care and will be better able to cope with shifting demands.

Informations de copyright

© British Journal of General Practice 2020.