IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/yor/hectdg/08-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Record rewards: the effect on risk factor monitoring of new financial incentives for UK general practices

Author

Listed:
  • Matt Sutton
  • Ross Elder
  • Bruce Guthrie
  • Graham Watt

Abstract

An innovative and expensive performance-related pay scheme was introduced for general practices across the UK in 2004. It was not piloted and baseline performance data were not collected prior to its introduction. We estimate the impact of this Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) by analysing annual rates of recording of blood pressure, smoking status, cholesterol, body mass index and alcohol consumption based on individual patient records from 315 general practices over the period 2000/1 to 2005/6. The recording of each risk factor is designated as incentivised or unincentivised for each individual based on whether they have one of the diagnoses targeted by the QOF. The estimated impact is sensitive to the dynamic specification of the recording process and was substantially larger on the targeted patient groups (+19.9 percentage points) than the untargeted groups (+5.3). We also find positive spillovers of (+10.9) for the targeted groups onto unincentivised factors. We propose that the intended rewards per additional record were under-estimated, because account was not taken of substantial multiple-payment for co-morbid patients, levels of pre-QOF recording and the additional rewards available for risk factor control that would be achieved by measurement alone. Based on naïve assumptions, we estimate the intended financial reward per additional risk factor record to be £4.40. Allowing for co-morbidity, pre-QOF performance and the additional ‘control’ rewards, increases this average reward eleven-fold, to £48.90. Taking account of the positive spillovers reduces this figure to £25.10, but it remains substantially larger than what appears to have been intended.

Suggested Citation

  • Matt Sutton & Ross Elder & Bruce Guthrie & Graham Watt, 2008. "Record rewards: the effect on risk factor monitoring of new financial incentives for UK general practices," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 08/21, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
  • Handle: RePEc:yor:hectdg:08/21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.york.ac.uk/media/economics/documents/herc/wp/08_21.pdf
    File Function: Main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hugh Gravelle & Matt Sutton & Ada Ma, 2008. "Doctor Behaviour Under a Pay for Performance Contract: Further Evidence from the Quality and Outcomes Framework," Working Papers 034cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    2. Paul Contoyannis & Andrew M. Jones & Nigel Rice, 2004. "The dynamics of health in the British Household Panel Survey," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 473-503.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Oddvar Kaarboe & Luigi Siciliani, 2011. "Multi‐tasking, quality and pay for performance," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(2), pages 225-238, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matt Sutton & Ross Elder & Bruce Guthrie & Graham Watt, 2010. "Record rewards: the effects of targeted quality incentives on the recording of risk factors by primary care providers," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 1-13, January.
    2. Damiano Fiorillo & Giuseppe Lubrano Lavadera & Nunzia Nappo, 2020. "Individual Heterogeneity in the Association Between Social Participation and Self-rated Health: A Panel Study on BHPS," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 151(2), pages 645-667, September.
    3. Svetlana Pashchenko & Ponpoje (Poe) Porapakkarm & Mariacristina De Nardi, 2017. "The Lifetime Costs of Bad Health," 2017 Meeting Papers 533, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    4. Greene, William, 2007. "Functional Form and Heterogeneity in Models for Count Data," Foundations and Trends(R) in Econometrics, now publishers, vol. 1(2), pages 113-218, August.
    5. Ozdamar, Oznur & Giovanis, Eleftherios, 2016. "Being Healthy in Turkey: A Pseudo-Panel Data Analysis," MPRA Paper 95838, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Maite Blázquez & Elena Cottini & Ainhoa Herrarte, 2014. "The socioeconomic gradient in health: how important is material deprivation?," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 12(2), pages 239-264, June.
    7. Shinsuke Asakawa, 2020. "Can Child Benefits Shape Parents' Attitudes toward Childrearing in Japan?: Effects of Child Benefit Policy Expansions," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 19-04-Rev.2, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    8. Lionel WILNER, 2019. "The Dynamics of Individual Happiness," Working Papers 2019-18, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    9. Mussida, Chiara & Sciulli, Dario, 2023. "The evolution of income distribution and disability in Europe," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 29-38.
    10. Odeyemi Gbenga A., 2015. "Understanding the Dynamics between Income and Health: Evidence Form African’s Richest and Poorest Countries," Journal of Public Policy & Governance, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 2(2), pages 56-67.
    11. Patricia Cubí‐Mollá & Mireia Jofre‐Bonet & Victoria Serra‐Sastre, 2017. "Adaptation to health states: Sick yet better off?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(12), pages 1826-1843, December.
    12. Andrew M. Jones & Audrey Laporte & Nigel Rice & Eugenio Zucchelli, 2019. "Dynamic panel data estimation of an integrated Grossman and Becker–Murphy model of health and addiction," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 703-733, February.
    13. van Ooijen, R. & Alessi, R. & Knoef, M., 2015. "Health status over the life cycle," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 15/21, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    14. Hernández-Quevedo, Cristina & Jones, Andrew M. & Rice, Nigel, 2008. "Persistence in health limitations: A European comparative analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 1472-1488, December.
    15. Maite Blázquez Cuesta & Elena Cottini & Herrarte, A. (Ainhoa), 2012. "GINI DP 39: Socioeconomic Gradient in Health: How Important is Material Deprivation?," GINI Discussion Papers 39, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    16. Jesus M. Carro & Alejandra Traferri, 2014. "State Dependence And Heterogeneity In Health Using A Bias‐Corrected Fixed‐Effects Estimator," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 181-207, March.
    17. repec:ucn:wpaper:10197/1111 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Katharina Hauck & Aki Tsuchiya, 2010. "Health mobility: implications for efficiency and equity in priority setting," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 6/10, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    19. Sirven, Nicolas, 2006. "Endogenous social capital and self-rated health: Cross-sectional data from rural areas of Madagascar," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(6), pages 1489-1502, September.
    20. Binder, Martin & Coad, Alex, 2013. "“I'm afraid I have bad news for you…” Estimating the impact of different health impairments on subjective well-being," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 155-167.
    21. Charlier, Dorothée & Legendre, Bérangère, 2021. "Fuel poverty in industrialized countries: Definition, measures and policy implications a review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    incentives; quality; primary care; payment systems; spillovers;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:yor:hectdg:08/21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jane Rawlings (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deyoruk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.