New Issue of Health Affairs: The Promise of Fee-for-Value, the Limits of Pay-for-Performance, and Lessons for Multipayer Medical Home Initiatives
In the new issue of <em>Health Affairs</em>, Commonwealth Fund–supported researchers report on: <ul>
<li>Results from an evaluation of one of the nation’s largest “fee-for-value” initiatives, in which primary care doctors were offered financial incentives to form patient-centered medical homes and engage in quality improvement activities. Christy Harris Lemak of the University of Alabama at Birmingham and colleagues found that physicians in the Michigan-based program <a href="/publications/journal-article/2015/apr/michigans-fee-value-physician-incentive-program-reduces">reduced spending</a> by more than 1 percent on a per-member per-month basis compared with a control group. </li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The efficacy of a performance incentive program that put an unusually large portion of physicians’ earnings at stake. The University of Oregon’s Jessica Greene <a href="/publications/journal-article/2015/apr/limits-pay-performance">spoke with The Commonwealth Fund</a> about her research team’s efforts to test the program and the limitations of financial incentives in health care. </li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>What it takes to make <a href="/publications/journal-article/2015/apr/making-multipayer-reform-work-what-can-be-learned-medical">multipayer medical home initiatives</a> work. Mary Takach and colleagues from the National Academy for State Health Policy collected data from 17 medical home programs launched between 2008 and 2014 that involved two or more payers. They looked at how each navigated four critical decision-making areas: convening stakeholders, establishing criteria for provider participation, determining payment, and measuring performance. </li>
</ul>