Belicza Eva, Evetovits Tamás
Egészségügyi Menedzserképzo Központ, Budapest/Semmelweis University, Health Services Management Training Centre, Budapest, H-1529 Budapest Pf. 610.
Lege Artis Med. 2010 May;20(5):331-8.
Policy makers and payers of health care services devote increasing attention to improve quality of services by incentivising health care providers. These--so called--pay for performance (P4P) programmes have so far been introduced in few countries only and evidence on their effectiveness is still scarce. Therefore we do not know yet which instruments of these programmes are most effective and efficient in improving quality. The P4P systems implemented so far in primary care and in integrated delivery systems use indicators for measurement of performance and the basis for rewards. These indicators are mostly process indicators, but there are some outcome indicators as well. The desired quality improvement effects are most likely to be achieved with programmes that provide seizable financial rewards and cover the extra cost of quality improvement efforts as well. Administration of the programme has to be fully transparent and clear to all involved. It has to be based on scientific evidence and supported with sufficient dedicated funding. Conducting pilot studies is a precondition for large scale implementation.
医疗服务的政策制定者和支付方越来越关注通过激励医疗服务提供者来提高服务质量。这些所谓的按绩效付费(P4P)项目到目前为止仅在少数国家推行,关于其有效性的证据仍然很少。因此,我们尚不清楚这些项目中的哪些手段在提高质量方面最有效且高效。到目前为止,在初级保健和综合医疗服务体系中实施的P4P系统使用指标来衡量绩效,并作为奖励的依据。这些指标大多是过程指标,但也有一些结果指标。那些能提供可观经济奖励并涵盖质量改进工作额外成本的项目,最有可能实现预期的质量提升效果。该项目的管理必须对所有相关方完全透明且清晰。它必须基于科学证据,并得到足够的专项资金支持。开展试点研究是大规模实施的前提条件。