Department of Sociology, University of New Brunswick, PO Box 4400, 9 Macaulay Lane, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3B 5A3, Canada.
Faculty of Management, University of New Brunswick, PO Box 4400, 7 Macaulay Lane, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3B 5A3, Canada.
Hum Resour Health. 2020 Sep 22;18(1):69. doi: 10.1186/s12960-020-00512-9.
Although pay-for-performance (P4P) among primary care physicians for enhanced chronic disease management is increasingly common, the evidence base is fragmented in terms of socially equitable impacts in achieving the quadruple aim for healthcare improvement: better population health, reduced healthcare costs, and enhanced patient and provider experiences. This study aimed to assess the literature from a systematic review on how P4P for diabetes services impacts on gender equity in patient outcomes and the physician workforce.
A gender-based analysis was performed of studies retrieved through a systematic search of 10 abstract and citation databases plus grey literature sources for P4P impact assessments in multiple languages over the period January 2000 to April 2018, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The study was restricted to single-payer national health systems to minimize the risk of physicians sorting out of health organizations with a strong performance pay component. Two reviewers scored and synthesized the integration of sex and gender in assessing patient- and provider-oriented outcomes as well as the quality of the evidence.
Of the 2218 identified records, 39 studies covering eight P4P interventions in seven countries were included for analysis. Most (79%) of the studies reported having considered sex/gender in the design, but only 28% presented sex-disaggregated patient data in the results of the P4P assessment models, and none (0%) assessed the interaction of patients' sex with the policy intervention. Few (15%) of the studies controlled for the provider's sex, and none (0%) discussed impacts of P4P on the work life of providers from a gender perspective (e.g., pay equity).
There is a dearth of evidence on gender-based outcomes of publicly funded incentivizing physician payment schemes for chronic disease care. As the popularity of P4P to achieve health system goals continues to grow, so does the risk of unintended consequences. There is a critical need for research integrating gender concerns to help inform performance-based health workforce financing policy options in the era of the Sustainable Development Goals.
虽然针对初级保健医生的按绩效付费(P4P)越来越常见,但在实现医疗改善的四重目标方面,即改善人口健康、降低医疗成本以及提高患者和医生的体验,该措施在社会公平方面的影响证据仍然是零散的。本研究旨在评估关于糖尿病服务的 P4P 如何影响患者结果和医生劳动力中的性别公平的系统评价文献。
根据《系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目》(PRISMA)指南,对从 2000 年 1 月至 2018 年 4 月期间用 10 种摘要和引文数据库以及灰色文献来源以多种语言进行的 P4P 影响评估的研究进行了基于性别的分析。该研究仅限于单一付款人国家卫生系统,以最大程度地降低医生因绩效薪酬成分较强的医疗机构而进行选择的风险。两位审查员对评估患者和提供者导向的结果以及证据质量的性别和性别整合进行了评分和综合。
在所确定的 2218 条记录中,有 39 项研究涵盖了七个国家的八项 P4P 干预措施,被纳入分析。大多数(79%)研究报告说在设计中考虑了性别/性别,但只有 28%在 P4P 评估模型的结果中呈现了按性别分类的患者数据,没有(0%)评估了患者性别的政策干预的交互作用。少数(15%)研究控制了提供者的性别,没有(0%)从性别角度讨论 P4P 对提供者工作生活的影响(例如薪酬公平)。
对于公共资助的激励医生支付方案用于慢性病护理的性别相关结果的证据很少。随着 P4P 实现卫生系统目标的普及程度不断提高,意外后果的风险也在增加。在可持续发展目标时代,迫切需要进行研究,将性别问题纳入其中,以帮助为基于绩效的卫生人力融资政策选择提供信息。