- 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
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
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
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The decline in the breast cancer incidence is 1.2% and it is not significant.
Published 10 February 2012
'twas ever thus
Published 10 February 2012
The value of historic human remains
Published 10 February 2012
In Praise of British Literature
Published 10 February 2012
Is real shared decision making possible?
Published 10 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Search for evidence goes on (5 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012