BMJ  2007;334:1357 (30 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.39238.890810.BE (published 19 June 2007)

Research

Impact of financial incentives on clinical autonomy and internal motivation in primary care: ethnographic study

National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL

Objective To explore the impact of financial incentives for quality of care on practice organisation, clinical autonomy, and internal motivation of doctors and nurses working in primary care.

Design Ethnographic case study.

Setting Two English general practices.

Participants 12 general practitioners, nine nurses, four healthcare assistants, and four administrative staff.

Main outcome measure Observation of practices over a five month period after the introduction of financial incentives for quality of care introduced in the 2004 general practitioner contract.

Results After the introduction of the quality and outcomes framework there was an increase in the use of templates to collect data on quality of care. New regimens of surveillance were adopted, with clinicians seen as "chasers" or the "chased," depending on their individual responsibility for delivering quality targets. Attitudes towards the contract were largely positive, although discontent was higher in the practice with a more intensive surveillance regimen. Nurses expressed more concern than doctors about changes to their clinical practice but also appreciated being given responsibility for delivering on targets in particular disease areas. Most doctors did not question the quality targets that existed at the time or the implications of the targets for their own clinical autonomy.

Conclusions Implementation of financial incentives for quality of care did not seem to have damaged the internal motivation of the general practitioners studied, although more concern was expressed by nurses.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Critical reflections on the rise of qualitative research

Catherine Pope and Nicholas Mays
BMJ 2009 339: b3425. [Full Text]

Payment for performance in health care

Russell Mannion and Huw T O Davies
BMJ 2008 336: 306-308. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

What about the impact on patient health?

Mark Strong and John Radford
BMJ 2007 335: 60. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The side effects of "P4P"

Douglas Kamerow
BMJ 2007 334: 0. [Extract] [Full Text]

Performance measurement and equity

Arlene S Bierman and Jocalyn P Clark
BMJ 2007 334: 1333-1334. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Improvements in quality of clinical care in English general practice 1998-2003: longitudinal observational study

Stephen M Campbell, Martin O Roland, Elizabeth Middleton, and David Reeves
BMJ 2005 331: 1121. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Primary care groups: Improving the quality of care through clinical governance

Stephen Campbell, Martin Roland, and David Wilkin
BMJ 2001 322: 1580-1582. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• McDonald, R., White, J., Marmor, T. R. (2009). Paying for Performance in Primary Medical Care: Learning about and Learning from "Success" and "Failure" in England and California. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 34: 747-776 [Abstract]  
• Pope, C., Mays, N. (2009). Critical reflections on the rise of qualitative research. BMJ 339: b3425-b3425 [Full text]  
• Stange, K. C., Ferrer, R. L. (2009). The Paradox of Primary Care. Ann Fam Med 7: 293-299 [Full text]  
• McDonald, R., Roland, M. (2009). Pay for Performance in Primary Care in England and California: Comparison of Unintended Consequences. Ann Fam Med 7: 121-127 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Christianson, J. B., Leatherman, S., Sutherland, K. (2008). Lessons From Evaluations of Purchaser Pay-for-Performance Programs: A Review of the Evidence. Med Care Res Rev 65: 5S-35S [Abstract]  
• Wilson, S., Draper, H., Ives, J. (2008). Ethical issues regarding recruitment to research studies within the primary care consultation. Fam Pract 25: 456-461 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Rosenthal, T. C. (2008). The Medical Home: Growing Evidence to Support a New Approach to Primary Care. J Am Board Fam Med 21: 427-440 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Maisey, S., Steel, N., Marsh, R., Gillam, S., Fleetcroft, R., Howe, A. (2008). Effects of payment for performance in primary care: qualitative interview study. J Health Serv Res Policy 13: 133-139 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Mannion, R., Davies, H. T O (2008). Payment for performance in health care. BMJ 336: 306-308 [Full text]  
• Murray, E. (2007). Improving management of chronic illness in the National Health Service: are better incentives really the key?. Chronic Illness 3: 197-199  
• (2007). How Pay for Performance Affects Care in England. JWatch General 2007: 3-3 [Full text]  
• Strong, M., Radford, J. (2007). What about the impact on patient health?. BMJ 335: 60-60 [Full text]  
• Bierman, A. S, Clark, J. P (2007). Performance measurement and equity. BMJ 334: 1333-1334 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Financial Incentives increases physicians’ perception of burden and affects consumer satisfaction.

Joan Gené-Badia, et al.
bmj.com, 2 Jul 2007 [Full text]

What about the impact of GP financial incentives on patient health?

Mark Strong, et al.
bmj.com, 4 Jul 2007 [Full text]

Re: What about the impact of GP financial incentives on patient health?

L S Lewis
bmj.com, 5 Jul 2007 [Full text]

Financial incentives for practices - and equity for patients

Caroline Mawer, et al.
bmj.com, 24 Jul 2007 [Full text]

Online poll

Find out more on doc2doc >>