Pay for Performance: Rationale and Potential Implications for Urology
- 31 August 2007
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Journal of Urology
- Vol. 178 (2) , 402-408
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.095
Abstract
Conclusions Many questions remain regarding the implementation of a pay for performance system in the field of urology. Government and private payers are motivated to implement pay for performance. However, specific evidence based metrics for urology that fairly and accurately define quality are currently lacking. Given that implementation of a nationwide pay for performance system appears to be inevitable, urology involvement in the development and implementation of these health care quality metrics is essential.Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Linking Compensation to Quality — Medicare Payments to PhysiciansNew England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Five Years After To Err Is HumanJAMA, 2005
- Pitfalls of Converting Practice Guidelines Into Quality MeasuresPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,2004
- Measuring the quality of surgical care: structure, process, or outcomes?1Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 2004
- The Quality of Medical Care Provided to Vulnerable Community-Dwelling Older PatientsAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2003
- The Implications of Regional Variations in Medicare Spending. Part 2: Health Outcomes and Satisfaction with CareAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2003
- The Implications of Regional Variations in Medicare Spending. Part 1: The Content, Quality, and Accessibility of CareAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2003
- Change in the Quality of Care Delivered to Medicare Beneficiaries, 1998-1999 to 2000-2001JAMA, 2003
- An Evidence-Based National Quality Measurement and Reporting SystemMedical Care, 2003
- The quality of care. How can it be assessed?JAMA, 1988