<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Concern over pay for performance</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.medrants.com/archives/2288/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2288</link>
	<description>Contemplating medicine and the health care system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:13:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: DB&#8217;s Medical Rants &#187; Quality - the number one issue</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2288/comment-page-1#comment-22275</link>
		<dc:creator>DB&#8217;s Medical Rants &#187; Quality - the number one issue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2005 15:47:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2005/03/01/concern-over-pay-for-performance/#comment-22275</guid>
		<description>[...]  measures will soon lead to pay for performance.  I have recently ranted on this subject - Concern over pay for performance. 	Despite our concerns, the train is c [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  measures will soon lead to pay for performance.  I have recently ranted on this subject &#8211; Concern over pay for performance. 	Despite our concerns, the train is c [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DB&#8217;s Medical Rants &#187; More on report cards</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2288/comment-page-1#comment-14066</link>
		<dc:creator>DB&#8217;s Medical Rants &#187; More on report cards</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2005 01:18:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2005/03/01/concern-over-pay-for-performance/#comment-14066</guid>
		<description>[...] rove care, but the may harm overall care 	I discussed this issue in some depth last week - Concern over pay for performance  	 	 	                         	 	 	   [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] rove care, but the may harm overall care 	I discussed this issue in some depth last week &#8211; Concern over pay for performance  	 	 	                         	 	 	   [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald E. L. Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2288/comment-page-1#comment-13495</link>
		<dc:creator>Donald E. L. Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2005 23:12:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2005/03/01/concern-over-pay-for-performance/#comment-13495</guid>
		<description>Robert,
Been awhile since I&#039;ve been here. Great new design, except for one thing. Where are the permalinks and trackbacks? Am I missing something?

Don.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Robert,<br />
Been awhile since I&#8217;ve been here. Great new design, except for one thing. Where are the permalinks and trackbacks? Am I missing something?</p>
<p>Don.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CHenry</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2288/comment-page-1#comment-13489</link>
		<dc:creator>CHenry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2005 22:27:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2005/03/01/concern-over-pay-for-performance/#comment-13489</guid>
		<description>One problem with &quot;report cards&quot;from third-party payors is that those doing the reporting have an interest in the outcome of the report, and not one necessarily congruent with those of the patients or the doctors.  If there is a payment held back, either as a strict percentage (very bad) or as a fund obtained from generalized discounting of all services (almost as bad), the organization doing the grading has an interest in finding fault and withholding funds.  Even if some performers are &quot;rewarded&quot; for meeting a particular standard, that does not necessarily mean the rewards offset the penalties.

Another problem is that these schemes inevitably lead to early referral (dumping) to avoid populating panels with patients with intractable and hard-to-control problems.
So that morbidly obese, depressed diabetic with uncontrolled serum glucose and hypertension now becomes a financial and professional liability instead of being just a difficult clinical challenge.  In the present climate where caring for difficult problems and patients is already unreasonably discounted, squeezing the physician with one more screw seems particularly unjust.  Why haven&#039;t the insurers and Medicare considered giving the compliant patients a break on their premiums instead?

Maybe there needs to be an independent evaluating organization to decide who meets standards of excellence in practice.  Consider a Consumers Union or Underwriters Laboratories certification for medical practices.  Patients who choose providers who earn good ratings get a break on their monthly premiums, but patients can choose to go wherever they want.  The incentive would exist for the practice to meet high standards and the incentive would exist for the patients to choose practices that held high standards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One problem with &#8220;report cards&#8221;from third-party payors is that those doing the reporting have an interest in the outcome of the report, and not one necessarily congruent with those of the patients or the doctors.  If there is a payment held back, either as a strict percentage (very bad) or as a fund obtained from generalized discounting of all services (almost as bad), the organization doing the grading has an interest in finding fault and withholding funds.  Even if some performers are &#8220;rewarded&#8221; for meeting a particular standard, that does not necessarily mean the rewards offset the penalties.</p>
<p>Another problem is that these schemes inevitably lead to early referral (dumping) to avoid populating panels with patients with intractable and hard-to-control problems.<br />
So that morbidly obese, depressed diabetic with uncontrolled serum glucose and hypertension now becomes a financial and professional liability instead of being just a difficult clinical challenge.  In the present climate where caring for difficult problems and patients is already unreasonably discounted, squeezing the physician with one more screw seems particularly unjust.  Why haven&#8217;t the insurers and Medicare considered giving the compliant patients a break on their premiums instead?</p>
<p>Maybe there needs to be an independent evaluating organization to decide who meets standards of excellence in practice.  Consider a Consumers Union or Underwriters Laboratories certification for medical practices.  Patients who choose providers who earn good ratings get a break on their monthly premiums, but patients can choose to go wherever they want.  The incentive would exist for the practice to meet high standards and the incentive would exist for the patients to choose practices that held high standards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
