Study raises concern over 'unintended consequences' of GP reward scheme

June 29, 2011, British Medical Journal

Improvements in quality of care associated with the GP pay for performance scheme in the UK appear to have been achieved at the expense of small detrimental effects on non-incentivised aspects of care, finds a study published in the British Medical Journal today.

The findings raise important questions about the potential unintended consequences of financial incentive schemes, in particular that they could lead to neglect of non-incentivised aspects of .

Since 2004, an incentive scheme known as the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), has linked one quarter of UK income to performance on a range of quality indicators.

The UK commits £1bn (€1.1bn; $1.6bn) annually in funding to the programme. Yet concerns remain about the potential unintended consequences of such schemes.

So a team of UK researchers compared changes in performance for indicators that became incentivised under the scheme with changes for indicators that did not.

Using data from the General Practice Research Database (GPRD), which contains anonymised patient records from more than 500 UK general practices, they examined trends in quality of care for 42 activities (23 incentivised and 19 non-incentivised) before and after the introduction of the scheme.

For all activities, there was a general improvement in quality prior to the introduction of financial incentives.

For incentivised activities, quality of care improved significantly in the first year of the scheme, but quickly reached a plateau in the second and third years of the scheme.

For non-incentivised activities, there was no overall effect on the rate of improvement in the first year of the scheme. However, by the third year of the scheme quality was significantly worse than projected from pre-incentive trends, possibly due to practices focusing on patients for whom rewards applied, say the authors.

These findings demonstrate some important limitations of financial incentive schemes in health care, they conclude, and the importance of monitoring – as far as possible – activities that are not incentivised, in addition to those that are, when determining the effects of such schemes.

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Women run faster after taking newly developed supplement, study finds

January 19, 2018
A new study found that women who took a specially prepared blend of minerals and nutrients for a month saw their 3-mile run times drop by almost a minute.

Americans are getting more sleep

January 19, 2018
Although more than one in three Americans still don't get enough sleep, a new analysis shows first signs of success in the fight for more shut eye. According to data from 181,335 respondents aged 15 and older who participated ...

Wine is good for you—to a point

January 18, 2018
The Mediterranean diet has become synonymous with healthy eating, but there's one thing in it that stands out: It's cool to drink wine.

Sleep better, lose weight?

January 17, 2018
(HealthDay)—Sleeplessness could cost you when it's time to stand on your bathroom scale, a new British study suggests.

Who uses phone apps to track sleep habits? Mostly the healthy and wealthy in US

January 16, 2018
The profile of most Americans who use popular mobile phone apps that track sleep habits is that they are relatively affluent, claim to eat well, and say they are in good health, even if some of them tend to smoke.

Improvements in mortality rates are slowed by rise in obesity in the United States

January 15, 2018
With countless medical advances and efforts to curb smoking, one might expect that life expectancy in the United States would improve. Yet according to recent studies, there's been a reduction in the rate of improvement in ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.