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
. 2015 Dec;50 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):2057-89.
doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12408. Epub 2015 Nov 9.

The Theory of Value-Based Payment Incentives and Their Application to Health Care

Affiliations

The Theory of Value-Based Payment Incentives and Their Application to Health Care

Douglas A Conrad. Health Serv Res. 2015 Dec.

Abstract

Objectives: To present the implications of agency theory in microeconomics, augmented by behavioral economics, for different methods of value-based payment in health care; and to derive a set of future research questions and policy recommendations based on that conceptual analysis.

Data sources: Original literature of agency theory, and secondarily behavioral economics, combined with applied research and empirical evidence on the application of those principles to value-based payment.

Study design: Conceptual analysis and targeted review of theoretical research and empirical literature relevant to value-based payment in health care.

Principal findings: Agency theory and secondarily behavioral economics have powerful implications for design of value-based payment in health care. To achieve improved value-better patient experience, clinical quality, health outcomes, and lower costs of care-high-powered incentives should directly target improved care processes, enhanced patient experience, and create achievable benchmarks for improved outcomes. Differing forms of value-based payment (e.g., shared savings and risk, reference pricing, capitation, and bundled payment), coupled with adjunct incentives for quality and efficiency, can be tailored to different market conditions and organizational settings.

Conclusions: Payment contracts that are "incentive compatible"-which directly encourage better care and reduced cost, mitigate gaming, and selectively induce clinically efficient providers to participate-will focus differentially on evidence-based care processes, will right-size and structure incentives to avoid crowd-out of providers' intrinsic motivation, and will align patient incentives with value. Future research should address the details of putting these and related principles into practice; further, by deploying these insights in payment design, policy makers will improve health care value for patients and purchasers.

Keywords: Incentives; agency theory; behavioral economics; value-based payment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Principal–Agent Relationships in Health Care

References

    1. Aaron, H. J. , and Lucia H. W.. 2013. “Only the Beginning: What's Next at the Health Insurance Exchanges?” New England Journal of Medicine 369 (13): 1185–7. - PubMed
    1. Barnes, A. J. , Hanoch Y., and Rice T.. 2014. “Determinants of Coverage Decisions in Health Insurance Marketplaces: Consumers’ Decision‐Making Abilities and the Amount of Information in Their Choice Environment.” Health Services Research 50 (1): 58–80. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12181. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Benzer, J. K. , Young G. J., Burgess J. F., Baker E., Mohr D. C., Charns M. P., and Kaboli P. J.. 2013. “Sustainability of Quality Improvement Following Removal of Pay‐for‐Performance Incentives.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 29 (1): 127–32. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Casalino, L. 2001. “Managing Uncertainty: Intermediate Organizations as Triple Agents.” Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law 26 (5): 1055–68. - PubMed
    1. Chalkley, M. , and Khalil F.. 2005. “Third Part Purchasing of Health Services: Patient Choice and Agency.” Journal of Health Economics 24: 1132–53. - PubMed

MeSH terms