基于绩效的预算对美国军事卫生保健设施质量结果的影响。

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Care Management Review Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1097/HMR.0000000000000372
Kimberly L Decker, Stephen D Schwab, Gloria J Bazzoli, Askar S Chukmaitov, Christian Wernz
{"title":"基于绩效的预算对美国军事卫生保健设施质量结果的影响。","authors":"Kimberly L Decker,&nbsp;Stephen D Schwab,&nbsp;Gloria J Bazzoli,&nbsp;Askar S Chukmaitov,&nbsp;Christian Wernz","doi":"10.1097/HMR.0000000000000372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Performance-based budgeting (PBB) is a variation of pay for performance that has been used in government hospitals but could be applicable to any integrated system. It works by increasing or decreasing funding based on preestablished performance thresholds, which incentivizes organizations to improve performance. In late 2006, the U.S. Army implemented a PBB program that tied hospital-level funding decisions to performance on key cost and quality-related metrics.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to estimate the impact of PBB on quality improvement in U.S. Army health care facilities.</p><p><strong>Approach: </strong>This study used a retrospective difference-in-differences analysis of data from two Defense Health Agency data repositories. The merged data set encompassed administrative, demographic, and performance information about 428 military health care facilities. Facility-level performance data on quality indicators were compared between 187 Army PBB facilities and a comparison group of 241 non-PBB Navy and Air Force facilities before and after program implementation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Army's PBB programs had a positive impact on quality performance. Relative to comparison facilities, facilities that participated in PBB programs increased performance for over half of the indicators under investigation. Furthermore, performance was either sustained or continued to improve over 5 years for five of the six performance indicators examined long term.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Study findings indicate that PBB may be an effective policy mechanism for improving facility-level performance on quality indicators.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>This study adds to the extant literature on pay for performance by examining the specific case of PBB. It demonstrates that quality performance can be influenced internally through centralized budgeting processes. Though specific to military hospitals, the findings might have applicability to other public and private sector hospitals who wish to incentivize performance internally in their organizational subunits through centralized budgeting processes.</p>","PeriodicalId":47778,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Management Review","volume":"48 3","pages":"249-259"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of performance-based budgeting on quality outcomes in U.S. military health care facilities.\",\"authors\":\"Kimberly L Decker,&nbsp;Stephen D Schwab,&nbsp;Gloria J Bazzoli,&nbsp;Askar S Chukmaitov,&nbsp;Christian Wernz\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/HMR.0000000000000372\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Performance-based budgeting (PBB) is a variation of pay for performance that has been used in government hospitals but could be applicable to any integrated system. It works by increasing or decreasing funding based on preestablished performance thresholds, which incentivizes organizations to improve performance. In late 2006, the U.S. Army implemented a PBB program that tied hospital-level funding decisions to performance on key cost and quality-related metrics.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to estimate the impact of PBB on quality improvement in U.S. Army health care facilities.</p><p><strong>Approach: </strong>This study used a retrospective difference-in-differences analysis of data from two Defense Health Agency data repositories. The merged data set encompassed administrative, demographic, and performance information about 428 military health care facilities. Facility-level performance data on quality indicators were compared between 187 Army PBB facilities and a comparison group of 241 non-PBB Navy and Air Force facilities before and after program implementation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Army's PBB programs had a positive impact on quality performance. Relative to comparison facilities, facilities that participated in PBB programs increased performance for over half of the indicators under investigation. Furthermore, performance was either sustained or continued to improve over 5 years for five of the six performance indicators examined long term.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Study findings indicate that PBB may be an effective policy mechanism for improving facility-level performance on quality indicators.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>This study adds to the extant literature on pay for performance by examining the specific case of PBB. It demonstrates that quality performance can be influenced internally through centralized budgeting processes. Though specific to military hospitals, the findings might have applicability to other public and private sector hospitals who wish to incentivize performance internally in their organizational subunits through centralized budgeting processes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Care Management Review\",\"volume\":\"48 3\",\"pages\":\"249-259\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Care Management Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000372\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000372","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:绩效预算(PBB)是一种绩效薪酬的变体,已在政府医院使用,但可适用于任何综合系统。它的工作原理是根据预先设定的绩效阈值增加或减少资金,从而激励组织提高绩效。2006年底,美国陆军实施了一项PBB计划,将医院层面的资金决策与关键成本和质量相关指标的绩效联系起来。目的:本研究的目的是评估PBB对美国陆军卫生保健设施质量改善的影响。方法:本研究对来自两个国防卫生机构数据库的数据进行了回顾性差异分析。合并后的数据集包括428个军事卫生保健设施的行政、人口统计和绩效信息。在项目实施前后,比较了187个陆军PBB设施和241个非PBB海军和空军设施的质量指标的设施级性能数据。结果:陆军PBB项目对质量绩效有积极影响。与比较设施相比,参与PBB计划的设施在调查中超过一半的指标上提高了绩效。此外,在长期审查的六项业绩指标中,有五项的业绩在五年内保持或继续改善。结论:研究结果表明,PBB可能是提高设施质量指标绩效的有效政策机制。实践启示:本研究通过考察PBB的具体案例,对现有的绩效薪酬文献进行了补充。它表明质量绩效可以通过集中预算流程在内部受到影响。虽然是针对军队医院的,但研究结果可能适用于其他希望通过集中预算编制程序在其组织子单位内部激励绩效的公立和私营医院。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Impact of performance-based budgeting on quality outcomes in U.S. military health care facilities.

Background: Performance-based budgeting (PBB) is a variation of pay for performance that has been used in government hospitals but could be applicable to any integrated system. It works by increasing or decreasing funding based on preestablished performance thresholds, which incentivizes organizations to improve performance. In late 2006, the U.S. Army implemented a PBB program that tied hospital-level funding decisions to performance on key cost and quality-related metrics.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to estimate the impact of PBB on quality improvement in U.S. Army health care facilities.

Approach: This study used a retrospective difference-in-differences analysis of data from two Defense Health Agency data repositories. The merged data set encompassed administrative, demographic, and performance information about 428 military health care facilities. Facility-level performance data on quality indicators were compared between 187 Army PBB facilities and a comparison group of 241 non-PBB Navy and Air Force facilities before and after program implementation.

Results: The Army's PBB programs had a positive impact on quality performance. Relative to comparison facilities, facilities that participated in PBB programs increased performance for over half of the indicators under investigation. Furthermore, performance was either sustained or continued to improve over 5 years for five of the six performance indicators examined long term.

Conclusion: Study findings indicate that PBB may be an effective policy mechanism for improving facility-level performance on quality indicators.

Practice implications: This study adds to the extant literature on pay for performance by examining the specific case of PBB. It demonstrates that quality performance can be influenced internally through centralized budgeting processes. Though specific to military hospitals, the findings might have applicability to other public and private sector hospitals who wish to incentivize performance internally in their organizational subunits through centralized budgeting processes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Care Management Review
Health Care Management Review HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Health Care Management Review (HCMR) disseminates state-of-the-art knowledge about management, leadership, and administration of health care systems, organizations, and agencies. Multidisciplinary and international in scope, articles present completed research relevant to health care management, leadership, and administration, as well report on rigorous evaluations of health care management innovations, or provide a synthesis of prior research that results in evidence-based health care management practice recommendations. Articles are theory-driven and translate findings into implications and recommendations for health care administrators, researchers, and faculty.
期刊最新文献
Improving joy at work and reducing burnout in health care workers in Victoria, Australia using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement joy in work framework: A mixed-methods study. What makes proactive behaviors at work effective? Perspectives of health care executives. Stanford Network for Advancement and Promotion: The impact of a community building-focused leadership development program on the success of underrepresented groups in academic medicine. Exploring barriers to employee voice among certified nursing assistants: A qualitative study. Good therapeutic connections and patient psychological safety: A qualitative survey study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1