Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000;1999(3):CD000531.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000531.

Target payments in primary care: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes

Affiliations

Target payments in primary care: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes

A Giuffrida et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000.

Abstract

Background: The method by which physicians are paid may affect their professional practice. Although payment systems may be used to achieve policy objectives (e.g. improving quality of care, cost containment and recruitment to under-served areas), little is known about the effects of different payment systems in achieving these objectives. Target payments are a payment system which remunerate professionals only if they provide a minimum level of care.

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of target payments on the professional practice of primary care physicians (PCPs) and health care outcomes.

Search strategy: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register; the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register; MEDLINE (1966 to October 1997); BIDS EMBASE (1980 to October 1997); BIDS ISI (1981 to October 1997); EconLit (1969 to October 1997); HealthStar (1975 to October 1997) Helmis (1984 to October 1997); health economics discussion paper series of the Universities of York, Aberdeen, Sheffield, Bristol, Brunel, and McMaster; Swedish Institute of Health Economics; RAND corporation; and reference lists of articles.

Selection criteria: Randomised trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series analyses of interventions comparing the impact of target payments to primary care professionals with alternative methods of payment, on patient outcomes, health services utilisation, health care costs, equity of care, and PCP satisfaction with working environment.

Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality.

Main results: Two studies were included involving 149 practices. The use of target payments in the remuneration of PCPs was associated with improvements in immunisation rates, but the increase was statistically significant in only one of the two studies.

Reviewer's conclusions: The evidence from the studies identified in this review is not of sufficient quality or power to obtain a clear answer to the question as to whether target payment remuneration provides a method of improving primary health care. Additional efforts should be directed in evaluating changes in physicians' remuneration systems. Although it would not be difficult to design a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the impact of such payment systems, it would be difficult politically to conduct such trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

References

References to studies included in this review

Kouides 1998 {published data only}
    1. Kouides RW, Bennett NM, Lewis B, Cappuccio JD, Barker WH, LaForce FM. Performance‐based physician reimbursement and influenza immunization rates in the elderly. The Primary‐Care Physicians of Monroe County. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 1998;14(2):89‐95. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Ritchie 1992 {published data only}
    1. Ritchie LD, Bisset AF, Russell D, Leslie V, Thomson I. Primary and preschool immunisation in Grampian: progress and the 1990 contract. British Medical Journal 1992;304(6830):816‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Hughes 1992 {published data only}
    1. Hughes D, Yule B. The effect of per‐item fees on the behaviour of general practitioners. Journal of Health Economics 1992;11(4):413‐37. - PubMed
Morrow 1995 {published data only}
    1. Morrow RW, Gooding AD, Clark C. Improving physicians' preventive health care behavior through peer review and financial incentives. Archives of Family Medicine 1995;4(2):165‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed

Additional references

Dept of Health 1989
    1. Department of Health. General practice in the NHS. A new contract. London: HMSO, 1989.
Donaldson 1989
    1. Donaldson C, Gerard K. Paying general practitioners: shedding light on the review of health services. Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 1989;39(320):114‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed
Gosden 2000
    1. Gosden T, Forland F, Kristiansen IS, Sutton M, Leese B, Giuffrida A, et al. Capitation, salary, fee‐for‐service and mixed systems of payment: effects on the behaviour of primary care physicians. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2000, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002215] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Vanselow 1995
    1. Vanselow NA, Donaldson MS, Yordy KD. From the Institute of Medicine. A new definition of primary care. Journal of the American Medical Association 1995;273(3):192. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms