Jeannette Brosig-Koch , Heike Hennig-Schmidt , Nadja Kairies-Schwarz , Johanna Kokot , Daniel Wiesen
{"title":"重新审视医生对经济激励措施的反应:医疗质量、业务特点和动机","authors":"Jeannette Brosig-Koch , Heike Hennig-Schmidt , Nadja Kairies-Schwarz , Johanna Kokot , Daniel Wiesen","doi":"10.1016/j.jhealeco.2024.102862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There is considerable controversy about what causes (in)effectiveness of physician performance pay in improving the quality of care. Using a behavioral experiment with German primary-care physicians, we study the incentive effect of performance pay on service provision and quality of care. To explore whether variations in quality are based on the incentive scheme and the interplay with physicians’ real-world profit orientation and patient-regarding motivations, we link administrative data on practice characteristics and survey data on physicians’ attitudes with experimental data. We find that, under performance pay, quality increases by about 7pp compared to baseline capitation. While the effect increases with the severity of illness, the bonus level does not significantly affect the quality of care. Data linkage indicates that primary-care physicians in high-profit practices provide a lower quality of care. Physicians’ other-regarding motivations and attitudes are significant drivers of high treatment quality.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629624000079/pdfft?md5=d933d7930a44452363910b6bbc41cf32&pid=1-s2.0-S0167629624000079-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A new look at physicians’ responses to financial incentives: Quality of care, practice characteristics, and motivations\",\"authors\":\"Jeannette Brosig-Koch , Heike Hennig-Schmidt , Nadja Kairies-Schwarz , Johanna Kokot , Daniel Wiesen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhealeco.2024.102862\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>There is considerable controversy about what causes (in)effectiveness of physician performance pay in improving the quality of care. Using a behavioral experiment with German primary-care physicians, we study the incentive effect of performance pay on service provision and quality of care. To explore whether variations in quality are based on the incentive scheme and the interplay with physicians’ real-world profit orientation and patient-regarding motivations, we link administrative data on practice characteristics and survey data on physicians’ attitudes with experimental data. We find that, under performance pay, quality increases by about 7pp compared to baseline capitation. While the effect increases with the severity of illness, the bonus level does not significantly affect the quality of care. Data linkage indicates that primary-care physicians in high-profit practices provide a lower quality of care. Physicians’ other-regarding motivations and attitudes are significant drivers of high treatment quality.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50186,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629624000079/pdfft?md5=d933d7930a44452363910b6bbc41cf32&pid=1-s2.0-S0167629624000079-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629624000079\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629624000079","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A new look at physicians’ responses to financial incentives: Quality of care, practice characteristics, and motivations
There is considerable controversy about what causes (in)effectiveness of physician performance pay in improving the quality of care. Using a behavioral experiment with German primary-care physicians, we study the incentive effect of performance pay on service provision and quality of care. To explore whether variations in quality are based on the incentive scheme and the interplay with physicians’ real-world profit orientation and patient-regarding motivations, we link administrative data on practice characteristics and survey data on physicians’ attitudes with experimental data. We find that, under performance pay, quality increases by about 7pp compared to baseline capitation. While the effect increases with the severity of illness, the bonus level does not significantly affect the quality of care. Data linkage indicates that primary-care physicians in high-profit practices provide a lower quality of care. Physicians’ other-regarding motivations and attitudes are significant drivers of high treatment quality.
期刊介绍:
This journal seeks articles related to the economics of health and medical care. Its scope will include the following topics:
Production and supply of health services;
Demand and utilization of health services;
Financing of health services;
Determinants of health, including investments in health and risky health behaviors;
Economic consequences of ill-health;
Behavioral models of demanders, suppliers and other health care agencies;
Evaluation of policy interventions that yield economic insights;
Efficiency and distributional aspects of health policy;
and such other topics as the Editors may deem appropriate.