The effect of pay-for-performance in nursing homes: Evidence from state medicaid programs

Rachel M. Werner, R. Tamara Konetzka, Daniel E. Polsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective Pay-for-performance (P4P) is commonly used to improve health care quality in the United States and is expected to be frequently implemented under the Affordable Care Act. However, evidence supporting its use is mixed with few large-scale, rigorous evaluations of P4P. This study tests the effect of P4P on quality of care in a large-scale setting - the implementation of P4P for nursing homes by state Medicaid agencies. Data Sources/Study Setting 2001-2009 nursing home Minimum Data Set and Online Survey, Certification, and Reporting (OSCAR) datasets. Study Design Between 2001 and 2009, eight state Medicaid agencies adopted P4P programs in nursing homes. We use a difference-in- differences approach to test for changes in nursing home quality under P4P, taking advantage of the variation in timing of implementation across these eight states and using nursing homes in the 42 non-P4P states plus Washington, DC as contemporaneous controls. Principal Findings Quality improvement under P4P was inconsistent. While three clinical quality measures (the percent of residents being physically restrained, in moderate to severe pain, and developed pressure sores) improved with the implementation of P4P in states with P4P compared with states without P4P, other targeted quality measures either did not change or worsened. Of the two structural measures of quality that were tied to payment (total number of deficiencies and nurse staffing) deficiency rates worsened slightly under P4P while staffing levels did not change. Conclusions Medicaid-based P4P in nursing homes did not result in consistent improvements in nursing home quality. Expectations for improvement in nursing home care under P4P should be tempered.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1393-1414
Number of pages22
JournalHealth services research
Volume48
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Incentive Reimbursement
Medicaid
Nursing Homes
Quality of Health Care
Pressure Ulcer
Information Storage and Retrieval
Certification
Home Care Services
Nursing Care
Quality Improvement
Nurses
Pain

Keywords

  • long-term care
  • nursing home quality
  • pay-for-performance
  • Quality of care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

The effect of pay-for-performance in nursing homes : Evidence from state medicaid programs. / Werner, Rachel M.; Konetzka, R. Tamara; Polsky, Daniel E.

In: Health services research, Vol. 48, No. 4, 01.08.2013, p. 1393-1414.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{93a65224e6a94d3b8d57bc3b439013be,
title = "The effect of pay-for-performance in nursing homes: Evidence from state medicaid programs",
abstract = "Objective Pay-for-performance (P4P) is commonly used to improve health care quality in the United States and is expected to be frequently implemented under the Affordable Care Act. However, evidence supporting its use is mixed with few large-scale, rigorous evaluations of P4P. This study tests the effect of P4P on quality of care in a large-scale setting - the implementation of P4P for nursing homes by state Medicaid agencies. Data Sources/Study Setting 2001-2009 nursing home Minimum Data Set and Online Survey, Certification, and Reporting (OSCAR) datasets. Study Design Between 2001 and 2009, eight state Medicaid agencies adopted P4P programs in nursing homes. We use a difference-in- differences approach to test for changes in nursing home quality under P4P, taking advantage of the variation in timing of implementation across these eight states and using nursing homes in the 42 non-P4P states plus Washington, DC as contemporaneous controls. Principal Findings Quality improvement under P4P was inconsistent. While three clinical quality measures (the percent of residents being physically restrained, in moderate to severe pain, and developed pressure sores) improved with the implementation of P4P in states with P4P compared with states without P4P, other targeted quality measures either did not change or worsened. Of the two structural measures of quality that were tied to payment (total number of deficiencies and nurse staffing) deficiency rates worsened slightly under P4P while staffing levels did not change. Conclusions Medicaid-based P4P in nursing homes did not result in consistent improvements in nursing home quality. Expectations for improvement in nursing home care under P4P should be tempered.",
keywords = "long-term care, nursing home quality, pay-for-performance, Quality of care",
author = "Werner, {Rachel M.} and Konetzka, {R. Tamara} and Polsky, {Daniel E.}",
year = "2013",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/1475-6773.12035",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "48",
pages = "1393--1414",
journal = "Health Services Research",
issn = "0017-9124",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of pay-for-performance in nursing homes

T2 - Evidence from state medicaid programs

AU - Werner, Rachel M.

AU - Konetzka, R. Tamara

AU - Polsky, Daniel E.

PY - 2013/8/1

Y1 - 2013/8/1

N2 - Objective Pay-for-performance (P4P) is commonly used to improve health care quality in the United States and is expected to be frequently implemented under the Affordable Care Act. However, evidence supporting its use is mixed with few large-scale, rigorous evaluations of P4P. This study tests the effect of P4P on quality of care in a large-scale setting - the implementation of P4P for nursing homes by state Medicaid agencies. Data Sources/Study Setting 2001-2009 nursing home Minimum Data Set and Online Survey, Certification, and Reporting (OSCAR) datasets. Study Design Between 2001 and 2009, eight state Medicaid agencies adopted P4P programs in nursing homes. We use a difference-in- differences approach to test for changes in nursing home quality under P4P, taking advantage of the variation in timing of implementation across these eight states and using nursing homes in the 42 non-P4P states plus Washington, DC as contemporaneous controls. Principal Findings Quality improvement under P4P was inconsistent. While three clinical quality measures (the percent of residents being physically restrained, in moderate to severe pain, and developed pressure sores) improved with the implementation of P4P in states with P4P compared with states without P4P, other targeted quality measures either did not change or worsened. Of the two structural measures of quality that were tied to payment (total number of deficiencies and nurse staffing) deficiency rates worsened slightly under P4P while staffing levels did not change. Conclusions Medicaid-based P4P in nursing homes did not result in consistent improvements in nursing home quality. Expectations for improvement in nursing home care under P4P should be tempered.

AB - Objective Pay-for-performance (P4P) is commonly used to improve health care quality in the United States and is expected to be frequently implemented under the Affordable Care Act. However, evidence supporting its use is mixed with few large-scale, rigorous evaluations of P4P. This study tests the effect of P4P on quality of care in a large-scale setting - the implementation of P4P for nursing homes by state Medicaid agencies. Data Sources/Study Setting 2001-2009 nursing home Minimum Data Set and Online Survey, Certification, and Reporting (OSCAR) datasets. Study Design Between 2001 and 2009, eight state Medicaid agencies adopted P4P programs in nursing homes. We use a difference-in- differences approach to test for changes in nursing home quality under P4P, taking advantage of the variation in timing of implementation across these eight states and using nursing homes in the 42 non-P4P states plus Washington, DC as contemporaneous controls. Principal Findings Quality improvement under P4P was inconsistent. While three clinical quality measures (the percent of residents being physically restrained, in moderate to severe pain, and developed pressure sores) improved with the implementation of P4P in states with P4P compared with states without P4P, other targeted quality measures either did not change or worsened. Of the two structural measures of quality that were tied to payment (total number of deficiencies and nurse staffing) deficiency rates worsened slightly under P4P while staffing levels did not change. Conclusions Medicaid-based P4P in nursing homes did not result in consistent improvements in nursing home quality. Expectations for improvement in nursing home care under P4P should be tempered.

KW - long-term care

KW - nursing home quality

KW - pay-for-performance

KW - Quality of care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879839568&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879839568&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1475-6773.12035

DO - 10.1111/1475-6773.12035

M3 - Article

C2 - 23398330

AN - SCOPUS:84879839568

VL - 48

SP - 1393

EP - 1414

JO - Health Services Research

JF - Health Services Research

SN - 0017-9124

IS - 4

ER -