Physician payment policy is shifting from one that incentivizes the delivery of more services without regard to quality or outcomes to one that incentivizes the delivery of high quality, resource conscious health care. Thoughtful incentive design can ease the transition process for both physicians and the Medicare program.
Public and private sector purchasers are actively working to design value-based payment programs to achieve the goals of improved quality and more efficient use of health care resources. How these programs are designed is a complex undertaking and one that will determine the likelihood of their success.
California health regulators should begin collecting physician identifiers as part of their routine data collection efforts about the services provided at the state's hospitals. Such a move would help providers improve quality by aiding efforts to benchmark performance and reduce variations in the delivery of care.
Promoting immunizations as a part of routine office-based medical practice is needed to improve adult vaccination rates, a highly effective way to curb the spread of diseases across communities, prevent needless illness and deaths, and lower health care costs.
This document explores how physician pay for performance (P4P) programs would affect health system performance along nine dimensions.
Discusses the tendencies of Air Force physicians and dentists to accept Multiyear Special Pay.
Summarizes the authors' analysis of the projected supply of and demand for physicians who provide patient care in a region that includes the Inland Southern California area.
This manual presents step-by-step guidelines for conceptualising, designing, and carrying out a study of the appropriateness of medical or surgical procedures (for either diagnosis or treatment) using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.
This report assesses the U.S. experience with publicly releasing health care performance data and offers guidelines for establishing public disclosure policy in the United Kingdom.
The authors conducted a workforce study of eye care providers (ophthalmologists, non-ophthalmic physicians, and optometrists) in the United States.
To compare the malpractice claims experience of physicians in a high malpractice risk population to those in a normal population, the authors used claims data from one national surplus lines malpractice insurer and one large standard lines malpractic...
The authors consider physicians' tasks along two dimensions, one concerned with the kinds of skills applied to problems of human health (technical vs. interpersonal) and the other with the orientation the physician assumes in choosing problems to add...
Since physicians provided 2.5 million more hospital visits in 1988 than in 1986, this study sought to provide a description of the determinants of how often physicians provide hospital visits and to present a baseline for studying changes in the ...
Reports results from an analysis of the satisfaction of active-duty physicians with their military practices.
Using medical malpractice claims data from the Medical Inter-Insurance Exchange of New Jersey, which insures approximately 70 percent of the physicians practicing in the state, this Note analyzes physician negligence.
This Note examines the factors that influence the use of physicians as assistants at surgery. Its goal is to describe general patterns of use, as well as to identify potentially inappropriate uses.
This study examines the implications of the retention behavior of Air Force volunteer physicians on the Air Force's physician procurement policy.
This study evaluates direct physician recruiting in light of recent trends in civilian physician incomes and other market indicators, ...
Documents a methodology for analyzing problems incurred in planning an Air Force Medical Service serving complementary and conflicting functions. The Note describes a mathematical programming model called the physician workforce design model, ...
RAND® is a registered trademark. Copyright © 1994-2013 RAND Corporation. Last Modified: September 15, 2010 Site Feedback »