HCPro.com
 
 

  Search search bar spacer Content Products    >

HCPRO'S SERVICES
 

Health Governance Report
 
Strategic planning, fiduciary responsibilities, community health initiatives, and leadership accountability for hospital trustees and CEOs. Keep your hospital board informed with HGR!

To view the entire newsletter issue, click the “View Entire Issue” link below

October 2008   (Volume 18, Issue 10) view entire issue
 
P4P a key tool in recruiting top-notch physicians
The pay-for-performance (P4P) model is catching on as a recruitment tool. During the past several years, hospitals and physician practices across the nation have begun experimenting with the es-tablishment of such systems as a way to not only improve quality and patient safety, but to better compete in today’s recruiting market.
 
Reactions to CMS’ P4P proposal run the gamut
CMS’ plan to reduce Medicare payments by 2%–5% and allow hospitals to buy back the money through top-notch performance or dramatic improvement has prompted plaudits from some, disappointment from others, and confusion from critics. In November 2007, the federal agency submitted its value-based purchasing program (VBP)—also known as pay for performance (P4P)—proposal to Congress. The proposal would reduce diagnostic-related group (DRG) payments by 2%–5% for Medicare patients.
 
A glimpse at the future of pay for performance
CMS initiated the concept of pay for performance (P4P) several years ago as a form of reward for providers who met pre-established targets for the delivery of healthcare services. P4P, in its original configuration, rewarded physicians and hospitals for meeting certain performance measures for quality. Since 2005, CMS has made changes to the incentives it is willing to pay extra for, as well as identified several preventable items for which it will not pay.
 
PHO, hospital track key indicators to attract P4P in cap contracts
As the rush by payers to reimburse providers based on performance turns into a stampede, it’s essential for physician groups and hospitals to band together in their approaches to quality initiatives, evidence-based medicine (EBM), pay for performance (P4P), and transparency. Such is the assessment of James Watson, principal at Professional Business Consultants in Oak Brook, IL, and Elizabeth M. Simpkin, president and founder of The Lo-well Group, Inc., in Chicago, who discussed quality improvement (QI) and P4P at the Healthcare Financial Management Association’s June 2007 Annual National Institute, held in San Diego.
 
Tools for competing successfully in a P4P environment
The benefits of competing successfully in a pay-for-performance (P4P) environment are relatively obvious: financial incentives, greater public awareness of quality, and improved physician-hospital alignment, to name a few. Although the benefits are clear, the means to achieve them are often slightly more confusing. To successfully compete in a P4P environment, organizations must ensure that they are equipped with the necessary tools.
 

Other recently-published articles from Health Governance Report:




HCPro, Inc.



*MAGNET™, MAGNET RECOGNITION PROGRAM®, and ANCC MAGNET RECOGNITION® are trademarks of the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC). The products and services of HCPro, Inc. and The Greeley Company are neither sponsored nor endorsed by the ANCC