IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v128y2023icp62-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pay-for-performance for primary health care in Brazil: A comparison with England's Quality Outcomes Framework and lessons for the future

Author

Listed:
  • Dantas Gurgel, Garibaldi
  • Kristensen, Søren Rud
  • da Silva, Everton Nunes
  • Gomes, Luciano Bezerra
  • Barreto, Jorge Otávio Maia
  • Kovacs, Roxanne J
  • Sampaio, Juliana
  • Bezerra, Adriana Falangola Benjamin
  • de Brito e Silva, Keila Silene
  • Shimizu, Helena Eri
  • de Sousa, Allan Nuno Alves
  • Fardousi, Nasser
  • Borghi, Josephine
  • Powell-Jackson, Timothy

Abstract

Pay-for-performance (P4P) has been widely applied in OECD countries to improve the quality of both primary and secondary care, and is increasingly being implemented in low- and middle-income countries. In 2011, Brazil introduced one of the largest P4P schemes in the world, the National Programme for Improving Primary Care Access and Quality (PMAQ). We critically assess the design of PMAQ, drawing on a comparison with England's quality and outcome framework which, like PMAQ, was implemented at scale relatively rapidly within a nationalised health system. A key feature of PMAQ was that payment was based on the performance of primary care teams but rewards were given to municipalities, who had autonomy in how the funds could be used. This meant the incentives felt by family health teams were contingent on municipality decisions on whether to pass the funds on as bonuses and the basis upon which they allocated the funds between and within teams. Compared with England's P4P scheme, performance measurement under PMAQ focused more on structural rather than process quality of care, relied on many more indicators, and was less regular. While PMAQ represented an important new funding stream for primary health care, our review suggests that theoretical incentives generated were unclear and could have been better structured to direct health providers towards improvements in quality of care.

Suggested Citation

  • Dantas Gurgel, Garibaldi & Kristensen, Søren Rud & da Silva, Everton Nunes & Gomes, Luciano Bezerra & Barreto, Jorge Otávio Maia & Kovacs, Roxanne J & Sampaio, Juliana & Bezerra, Adriana Falangola Ben, 2023. "Pay-for-performance for primary health care in Brazil: A comparison with England's Quality Outcomes Framework and lessons for the future," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 62-68.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:128:y:2023:i:c:p:62-68
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.11.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851022002858
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.11.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oddvar Kaarboe & Luigi Siciliani, 2011. "Multi‐tasking, quality and pay for performance," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(2), pages 225-238, February.
    2. Canice Prendergast, 1999. "The Provision of Incentives in Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 7-63, March.
    3. Martin Chalkley & Andrew J. Mirelman & Luigi Siciliani & Marc Suhrcke & Peter Berman, 2020. "Paying for Performance for Health Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: An Economic Perspective," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Paul Revill & Marc Suhrcke & Rodrigo Moreno-Serra & Mark Sculpher (ed.), Global Health Economics Shaping Health Policy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries, chapter 6, pages 157-190, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1991. "Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 24-52, Special I.
    5. Eggleston, Karen, 2005. "Multitasking and mixed systems for provider payment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 211-223, January.
    6. Milstein, Ricarda & Schreyoegg, Jonas, 2016. "Pay for performance in the inpatient sector: A review of 34 P4P programs in 14 OECD countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(10), pages 1125-1140.
    7. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1993. "A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121743, December.
    8. Blomqvist, Ake, 1991. "The doctor as double agent: Information asymmetry, health insurance, and medical care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 411-432.
    9. Simon Burgess & Marisa Ratto, 2003. "The Role of Incentives in the Public Sector: Issues and Evidence," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 19(2), pages 285-300, Summer.
    10. Kandel, Eugene & Lazear, Edward P, 1992. "Peer Pressure and Partnerships," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(4), pages 801-817, August.
    11. Ogundeji, Yewande Kofoworola & Bland, John Martin & Sheldon, Trevor Andrew, 2016. "The effectiveness of payment for performance in health care: A meta-analysis and exploration of variation in outcomes," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(10), pages 1141-1150.
    12. Olívia Lucena de Medeiros & Jorge Otávio Maia Barreto & Matthew Harris & Letícia Xander Russo & Everton Nunes da Silva, 2020. "Delivering maternal and childcare at primary healthcare level: The role of PMAQ as a pay for performance strategy in Brazil," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, October.
    13. Mookherjee Dilip & Reichelstein Stefan, 2001. "Incentives and Coordination in Hierarchies," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-38, April.
    14. Simon Burgess & Marisa Ratto, 2003. "The Role of Incentives in the Public Sector: Issues and Evidence," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 03/071, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pierre Koning & J. Vyrastekova & S. Onderstal, 2006. "Team incentives in public organisations; an experimental study," CPB Discussion Paper 60, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. Antonio Sánchez Soliño, 2019. "Sustainability of Public Services: Is Outsourcing the Answer?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Paul H. Jensen & Robin E. Stonecash, 2004. "The Efficiency of Public Sector Outsourcing Contracts: A Literature Review," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n29, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    4. Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodoropoulos, Nikolaos, 2009. "Performance Pay as an Incentive for Lower Absence Rates in Britain," MPRA Paper 18238, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Kuhn, Michael & Siciliani, Luigi, 2013. "Manipulation and auditing of public sector contracts," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 251-267.
    6. Paul H. Jensen & Robin E. Stonecash, 2005. "Incentives and the Efficiency of Public Sector‐outsourcing Contracts," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 767-787, December.
    7. Nannerup, Niels & Olsen, Kasper Krogh, 2014. "Multitasking and performance measurement," Discussion Papers on Economics 20/2014, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Economics.
    8. McCausland, David & Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2005. "Some are Punished and Some are Rewarded: A Study of the Impact of Performance Pay on Job Satisfaction," MPRA Paper 14243, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Simon Burgess & Carol Propper & Marisa Ratto & Emma Tominey, 2017. "Incentives in the Public Sector: Evidence from a Government Agency," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 117-141, October.
    10. Kristensen, Søren Rud & Siciliani, Luigi & Sutton, Matt, 2016. "Optimal price-setting in pay for performance schemes in health care," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 57-77.
    11. Luis Garicano & Tano Santos, 2004. "Referrals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 499-525, June.
    12. Kirsten Bregn, 2013. "Detrimental Effects of Performance-Related Pay in the Public Sector? On the Need for a Broader Theoretical Perspective," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 21-35, March.
    13. Jana Vyrastekova & Sander Onderstal & Pierre Koning, 2012. "Self-selection and the power of incentive schemes: an experimental study," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(32), pages 4211-4219, November.
    14. Konstantinos Pouliakas, 2010. "Pay Enough, Don't Pay Too Much or Don't Pay at All? The Impact of Bonus Intensity on Job Satisfaction," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(4), pages 597-626, November.
    15. Domenico Lisi & Luigi Siciliani & Odd Rune Straume, 2020. "Hospital competition under pay‐for‐performance: Quality, mortality, and readmissions," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 289-314, April.
    16. Pouliakas, Konstantinos, 2008. "Pay enough, don’t pay too much or don’t pay at all? An empirical study of the non-monotonic impact of incentives on job satisfaction," MPRA Paper 10031, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Mak, Henry Y., 2018. "Managing imperfect competition by pay for performance and reference pricing," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 131-146.
    18. Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2012. "Rewarding carrots and crippling sticks: Eliciting employee preferences for the optimal incentive design," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1247-1265.
    19. repec:dau:papers:123456789/12197 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Pouliakas, Konstantinos & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2009. "Rewarding Carrots & Crippling Sticks: Eliciting Employee Preferences for the Optimal Incentive Mix in Europe," MPRA Paper 14167, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Iezzi, Elisa & Lippi Bruni, Matteo & Ugolini, Cristina, 2014. "The role of GP's compensation schemes in diabetes care: Evidence from panel data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 104-120.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:128:y:2023:i:c:p:62-68. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.