MDs unaware if P4P included in compensation

One in six physicians in a national survey did not know whether pay-for-performance was incorporated into their compensation, according to a research letter published Oct. 14 by JAMA Internal Medicine.

Kira Ryskina, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine in Philadelphia, and colleagues decided to investigate physician awareness of incentives on a national scale by conducting a cross-sectional analysis using the 2007-2008 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS).

The survey was completed by 2,545 eligible physicians who were asked whether they received compensation for quality or patient satisfaction. Percentages reported were nationally weighted data. The researchers utilized multivariate logistic regression to identify which physician and practice characteristics were independently associated with physician’s lack of awareness of incentive payments.

Results indicated that 21.5 percent were compensated for quality, while 18.7 percent were compensated for satisfaction. Sixteen percent of respondents were not sure if they received compensation for patient satisfaction, while 16.2 percent didn’t know if they were compensated for quality. Those who didn’t know were more likely to work in an urban setting or a free-standing clinic, and less likely to work in a community health setting.

“If payers want pay-for-performance programs to be more effective, they may need to ensure that physicians understand what incentives are and how they might affect their compensation,” the authors wrote.

Around the web

GE HealthCare designed the new-look Revolution Vibe CT scanner to help hospitals and health systems embrace CCTA and improve overall efficiency.

Clinicians have been using HeartSee to diagnose and treat coronary artery disease since the technology first debuted back in 2018. These latest updates, set to roll out to existing users, are designed to improve diagnostic performance and user access.

The cardiac technologies clinicians use for CVD evaluations have changed significantly in recent years, according to a new analysis of CMS data. While some modalities are on the rise, others are being utilized much less than ever before.