Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
University of Brasília, Brasília, Brazil.
PLoS Med. 2022 Jul 7;19(7):e1004033. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004033. eCollection 2022 Jul.
Pay-for-performance (P4P) programmes to incentivise health providers to improve quality of care have been widely implemented globally. Despite intuitive appeal, evidence on the effectiveness of P4P is mixed, potentially due to differences in how schemes are designed. We exploited municipality variation in the design features of Brazil's National Programme for Improving Primary Care Access and Quality (PMAQ) to examine whether performance bonuses given to family health team workers were associated with changes in the quality of care and whether the size of bonus mattered.
For this quasi-experimental study, we used a difference-in-differences approach combined with matching. We compared changes over time in the quality of care delivered by family health teams between (bonus) municipalities that chose to use some or all of the PMAQ money to provide performance-related bonuses to team workers with (nonbonus) municipalities that invested the funds using traditional input-based budgets. The primary outcome was the PMAQ score, a quality of care index on a scale of 0 to 100, based on several hundred indicators (ranging from 598 to 660) of health care delivery. We did one-to-one matching of bonus municipalities to nonbonus municipalities based on baseline demographic and economic characteristics. On the matched sample, we used ordinary least squares regression to estimate the association of any bonus and size of bonus with the prepost change over time (between November 2011 and October 2015) in the PMAQ score. We performed subgroup analyses with respect to the local area income of the family health team. The matched analytical sample comprised 2,346 municipalities (1,173 nonbonus municipalities; 1,173 bonus municipalities), containing 10,275 family health teams that participated in PMAQ from the outset. Bonus municipalities were associated with a 4.6 (95% CI: 2.7 to 6.4; p < 0.001) percentage point increase in the PMAQ score compared with nonbonus municipalities. The association with quality of care increased with the size of bonus: the largest bonus group saw an improvement of 8.2 percentage points (95% CI: 6.2 to 10.2; p < 0.001) compared with the control. The subgroup analysis showed that the observed improvement in performance was most pronounced in the poorest two-fifths of localities. The limitations of the study include the potential for bias from unmeasured time-varying confounding and the fact that the PMAQ score has not been validated as a measure of quality of care.
Performance bonuses to family health team workers compared with traditional input-based budgets were associated with an improvement in the quality of care.
为激励医疗服务提供者提高医疗质量而实施的按绩效付费(P4P)计划已在全球范围内广泛实施。尽管从直觉上看很有吸引力,但 P4P 的有效性证据却参差不齐,这可能是由于方案设计的差异所致。我们利用巴西改善初级保健获取和质量国家方案(PMAQ)在设计特征方面的市级差异,研究了向家庭医疗团队工作人员发放的绩效奖金是否与医疗质量的变化有关,以及奖金的规模是否重要。
在这项准实验研究中,我们采用了差异中的差异方法,并结合了匹配方法。我们比较了在选择使用部分或全部 PMAQ 资金为团队工作人员提供与绩效相关的奖金的(奖金)市与投资资金使用传统投入为基础的预算的(非奖金)市之间,家庭医疗团队提供的医疗质量在时间上的变化。主要结果是 PMAQ 评分,这是一个基于数百个(598 至 660 个)医疗保健提供指标的 0 至 100 分的医疗质量指数。我们根据基线人口统计学和经济特征对奖金市和非奖金市进行一对一匹配。在匹配的样本中,我们使用普通最小二乘回归来估计任何奖金和奖金规模与 PMAQ 评分在时间上的前后变化(2011 年 11 月至 2015 年 10 月)之间的关联。我们对家庭医疗团队所在地区的收入进行了亚组分析。匹配的分析样本包括 2346 个市(1173 个非奖金市;1173 个奖金市),其中有 10275 个家庭医疗团队从一开始就参与了 PMAQ。与非奖金市相比,奖金市的 PMAQ 评分增加了 4.6 个百分点(95%置信区间:2.7 至 6.4;p<0.001)。与质量相关的关联随着奖金规模的增加而增加:最大的奖金组的改善幅度为 8.2 个百分点(95%置信区间:6.2 至 10.2;p<0.001),与对照组相比。亚组分析表明,在最贫困的五分之二的地区,观察到的绩效提高最为明显。研究的局限性包括由于未测量的时变混杂因素而存在的偏差以及 PMAQ 评分尚未作为质量测量标准得到验证的事实。
与传统的基于投入的预算相比,向家庭医疗团队工作人员发放的绩效奖金与医疗质量的提高有关。