- Albert DiPiero (dipieroa@ohsu.edu), co-chair1,
- David G Sanders, co-chair1
- 1HealthOregon, 503 NE Laddington Court, Portland, OR 97232, USA
- Correspondence to: A DiPiero, Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, L475, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Portland, OR 97239, USA
Fee-for-service is more than a payment method; it defines the method of care. Fee-for-condition—a payment method that rewards superior results and encourages innovation—could greatly improve care for chronic conditions
Introduction
Chronic diseases represent a growing burden of morbidity, mortality, and cost worldwide. Although mounting evidence points to the important clinical benefits of the chronic care model (figure), most systems have no economic incentive for reorganising care around such a model. The challenge today is not how to deliver high quality chronic care, but how to structure a mechanism that rewards providers for innovation and continual improvement in chronic care. Most payment methods in use today inhibit innovations in care. We propose that payment for caring for a condition would greatly improve care for chronic conditions by financially rewarding superior results. We describe a condition based payment method and what providers can do to implement it.
The chronic care model. Source:www.improvingchroniccare.org/change/model/components.html
The barrier to using the chronic care model: fee-for-service
An increasing number of studies support the benefits of a more coordinated and planned approach to the care of chronic diseases.12 However, today's dominant payment method, fee-for-service, inhibits adopting the chronic care model and redesign of the delivery system.34 Fee-for-service really means “fee-for-task.” The provider receives payment for individual tasks—office visits, stays in hospital, operations, and so on. In this way, the healthcare enterprise operates like a business that pays employees to answer phones, type memos, and make copies rather than for solving clients' problems. Fee-for-service denies the provider the control of financial resources. Under fee-for-service, a medical practice cannot allocate resources and organise itself to maximise results. For example, if a practice finds that a nurse can perform a service more effectively than a doctor, or if remote communication is beneficial in certain situations, the practice would need to reduce its compensation by replacing the …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Ventilator associated pneumonia
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Restless legs syndrome
Published 30 May 2012
Author's reply
Published 30 May 2012
Re: Full access to trial data holds many benefits and a few pitfalls, conference hears
Published 30 May 2012
Restless Legs Syndrome: Fact or Fiction
Published 30 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27