Lagging quality of care in the U.S. health care system has been a persistent problem and challenge. In the past, medical professionalism and professional certification have served as cornerstones for improving quality in health care. Among newer efforts to improve quality, pay for performance has been proposed to propel better results, but many observers are concerned that pay for performance is at odds with medical professionalism. The authors examine the potential conflicts between pay for performance and medical professionalism and conclude that properly designed pay-for-performance models can support professional objectives.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.
Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.