Evaluation of financial incentives as a quality improvement strategy in the public hospital context : clinician attitudes, design variables, and economic costs

In 2008, a three-year pilot ‘pay for performance’ (P4P) program, known as ‘Clinical Practice Improvement Payment’ (CPIP) was introduced into Queensland Health (QHealth). QHealth is a large public health sector provider of acute, community, and public health services in Queensland, Australia. The organisation has recently embarked on a significant reform agenda including a review of existing funding arrangements (Duckett et al., 2008). Partly in response to this reform agenda, a casemix funding model has been implemented to reconnect health care funding with outcomes. CPIP was conceptualised as a performance-based scheme that rewarded quality with financial incentives. This is the first time such a scheme has been implemented into the public health sector in Australia with a focus on rewarding quality, and it is unique in that it has a large state-wide focus and includes 15 Districts. CPIP initially targeted five acute and community clinical areas including Mental Health, Discharge Medication, Emergency Department, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Stroke. The CPIP scheme was designed around key concepts including the identification of clinical indicators that met the set criteria of: high disease burden, a well defined single diagnostic group or intervention, significant variations in clinical outcomes and/or practices, a good evidence, and clinician control and support (Ward, Daniels, Walker & Duckett, 2007). This evaluative research targeted Phase One of implementation of the CPIP scheme from January 2008 to March 2009. A formative evaluation utilising a mixed methodology and complementarity analysis was undertaken. The research involved three research questions and aimed to determine the knowledge, understanding, and attitudes of clinicians; identify improvements to the design, administration, and monitoring of CPIP; and determine the financial and economic costs of the scheme. Three key studies were undertaken to ascertain responses to the key research questions. Firstly, a survey of clinicians was undertaken to examine levels of knowledge and understanding and their attitudes to the scheme. Secondly, the study sought to apply Statistical Process Control (SPC) to the process indicators to assess if this enhanced the scheme and a third study examined a simple economic cost analysis. The CPIP Survey of clinicians elicited 192 clinician respondents. Over 70% of these respondents were supportive of the continuation of the CPIP scheme. This finding was also supported by the results of a quantitative altitude survey that identified positive attitudes in 6 of the 7 domains-including impact, awareness and understanding and clinical relevance, all being scored positive across the combined respondent group. SPC as a trending tool may play an important role in the early identification of indicator weakness for the CPIP scheme. This evaluative research study supports a previously identified need in the literature for a phased introduction of Pay for Performance (P4P) type programs. It further highlights the value of undertaking a formal risk assessment of clinician, management, and systemic levels of literacy and competency with measurement and monitoring of quality prior to a phased implementation. This phasing can then be guided by a P4P Design Variable Matrix which provides a selection of program design options such as indicator target and payment mechanisms. It became evident that a clear process is required to standardise how clinical indicators evolve over time and direct movement towards more rigorous ‘pay for performance’ targets and the development of an optimal funding model. Use of this matrix will enable the scheme to mature and build the literacy and competency of clinicians and the organisation as implementation progresses. Furthermore, the research identified that CPIP created a spotlight on clinical indicators and incentive payments of over five million from a potential ten million was secured across the five clinical areas in the first 15 months of the scheme. This indicates that quality was rewarded in the new QHealth funding model, and despite issues being identified with the payment mechanism, funding was distributed. The economic model used identified a relative low cost of reporting (under $8,000) as opposed to funds secured of over $300,000 for mental health as an example. Movement to a full cost effectiveness study of CPIP is supported. Overall the introduction of the CPIP scheme into QHealth has been a positive and effective strategy for engaging clinicians in quality and has been the catalyst for the identification and monitoring of valuable clinical process indicators. This research has highlighted that clinicians are supportive of the scheme in general; however, there are some significant risks that include the functioning of the CPIP payment mechanism. Given clinician support for the use of a pay–for-performance methodology in QHealth, the CPIP scheme has the potential to be a powerful addition to a multi-faceted suite of quality improvement initiatives within QHealth.

Pilot Study of clinician attitudes to insulin pump therapy: international differences and the need for a greater understanding of the patient perspective

OBJECTIVES: To identify and survey health care professionals (HCPs) attitudes to insulin pump therapy (CSII).

METHODS: Eight specialists were interviewed to explore the attitudes and beliefs about CSII. Responses were analysed thematically and used to inform the design of a new 22-item questionnaire: the Attitudes to Pump Therapy (APT) Survey. The APT was pilottested among 95 HCPs (54% male; 75.5% diabetologists/DSNs, 13.8% general practitioners) at the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) conference, 2006. Results were analysed using non-parametric statistics with bonferroni correction.

RESULTS: Analyses of interview data identified 9 themes: biomedical, perceived control of care/diabetes, technology, quality of life, financial resources, training, education & support, suitability, and evidence-base. Items were designed to reflect these themes with responses scored on a 5-point Likert scale (strongly agree—strongly disagree). No statistically significant differences
were found by gender, HCP speciality, country (and continent) of origin or proportion of patients using CSII. Most notable differences were found in relation to gross domestic product (GDP) and the potential for pump therapy to achieve tight blood glucose control (lower GDP = more agreement: p = 0.001), and result in diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) (lower GDP = less agreement: p < 0.005). Ranked mean scores showed a split between biomedical/clinical items (N = 11) and items concerned with patient experience (N = 11). Attitudes about biomedical/clinical issues were generally clear (i.e. for 7/11 items, the mean score was “agree”) but less decisive about patient experience (i.e. for 8/11 items, the mean score was “neither agree nor disagree”).

CONCLUSION: Few subgroup differences existed, but those that did may be explained by lack of access to treatment (directly corresponding to GDP). Clinicians’ were generally clear in their attitudes regarding biomedical aspects but less so regarding patient experience. Research focusing on patient-reported outcomes is likely to offer clinicians a greater understanding of the patients’ perspective of insulin pump therapy.

An exploration of how clinician attitudes and beliefs influence the implementation of lifestyle risk factor management in primary healthcare: a grounded theory study

Background

Despite the effectiveness of brief lifestyle intervention delivered in primary healthcare (PHC), implementation in routine practice remains suboptimal. Beliefs and attitudes have been shown to be associated with risk factor management practices, but little is known about the process by which clinicians' perceptions shape implementation. This study aims to describe a theoretical model to understand how clinicians' perceptions shape the implementation of lifestyle risk factor management in routine practice. The implications of the model for enhancing practices will also be discussed.

Methods

The study analysed data collected as part of a larger feasibility project of risk factor management in three community health teams in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. This included journal notes kept through the implementation of the project, and interviews with 48 participants comprising 23 clinicians (including community nurses, allied health practitioners and an Aboriginal health worker), five managers, and two project officers. Data were analysed using grounded theory principles of open, focused, and theoretical coding and constant comparative techniques to construct a model grounded in the data.

Results

The model suggests that implementation reflects both clinician beliefs about whether they should (commitment) and can (capacity) address lifestyle issues. Commitment represents the priority placed on risk factor management and reflects beliefs about role responsibility congruence, client receptiveness, and the likely impact of intervening. Clinician beliefs about their capacity for risk factor management reflect their views about self-efficacy, role support, and the fit between risk factor management ways of working. The model suggests that clinicians formulate different expectations and intentions about how they will intervene based on these beliefs about commitment and capacity and their philosophical views about appropriate ways to intervene. These expectations then provide a cognitive framework guiding their risk factor management practices. Finally, clinicians' appraisal of the overall benefits versus costs of addressing lifestyle issues acts to positively or negatively reinforce their commitment to implementing these practices.

Conclusion

The model extends previous research by outlining a process by which clinicians' perceptions shape implementation of lifestyle risk factor management in routine practice. This provides new insights to inform the development of effective strategies to improve such practices.

Family presence during management of acute deterioration: clinician attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of current practices

BACKGROUND: The nature of acute clinical deterioration has changed over the last three decades with a decrease in in-hospital cardiac arrests and an increase in acute clinical deterioration. Despite this change, research related to family presence continues to focus on care during resuscitation rather than during acute deterioration. AIM: To explore healthcare clinician attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of current practices surrounding family presence during episodes of acute deterioration in adult Emergency Department patients. METHODS: Clinicians (n=156) from a single study site in Melbourne, Australia completed a 17-item survey. RESULTS: Participants disagreed that family members would interrupt (59.0%) or interfere (61.5%) with patient care if present during episodes of patient deterioration. Most (77.6%) participants stated that they included family during episodes of patient deterioration. Females, nurses and Australians/New Zealanders had a more positive attitude towards including family during episodes of patient deterioration when compared to males, doctors and clinicians of other ethnicities. Nurses with post-graduate qualifications and those with more years of experience had a more positive attitude towards including family during episodes of patient deterioration than nurses without post-graduation qualification and with less years of experience. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians had predominantly positive attitudes towards including family during episodes of patient deterioration and perceived it to be a common day-to-day practice. Gender, profession, country of birth, education level and years of experience all impacted on clinician attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of family presence during acute deterioration.

Crisis and triage clinicians' attitudes toward working with people with personality disorder

PURPOSE. This study aimed to investigate the attitudes of Australian psychiatric triage and crisis clinicians toward those with a diagnosis of personality disorder.
DESIGN AND METHODS. The design of the study was exploratory descriptive research. The study employed a survey method using Bowers and Allan's (2006) Attitude to Personality Disorder Questionnaire, which was designed to identify global attitudes toward those with a diagnosis of personality disorder.
FINDINGS. The findings of this study indicate that psychiatric crisis and triage clinicians hold negative attitudes toward those with a diagnosis of personality disorder.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS. Education and clinical supervision is required to address negative clinician attitudes.

Attitudes of mental health staff to routine outcome measurement

Background: Routine outcome measurement is mandated in public mental health services in Australia, but uptake and compliance are variable. This may be because of uncertainties and resistances among clinicians.
Aims: To survey attitudes and practices to routine outcome measurement among staff in adult area mental health services and to elucidate their correlates.
Method: As part of a larger study, a specifically designed questionnaire was distributed to all staff.
Results: A high return rate was achieved. A wide range of opinion was found. Staff who had attended training reported the measures as easier to use than those who had not. Staff who had recently seen feedback rated outcome measures as more valuable but less easy to use than those who had not seen feedback. Compared to other disciplines, medical staff and psychologists tended to rate outcome measures as less useful.
Conclusions: The results have implications for the implementation and sustainability of routine outcome measurement. They highlight the need for staff to receive targeted training and usable reports, and to have access to resources to extract meaning and value from outcome measures.

Should I and Can I?: a mixed methods study of clinician beliefs and attitudes in the management of lifestyle risk factors in primary health care

Background
Primary health care (PHC) clinicians have an important role to play in addressing lifestyle risk factors for chronic diseases. However they intervene only rarely, despite the opportunities that arise within their routine clinical practice. Beliefs and attitudes have been shown to be associated with risk factor management practices, but little is known about this for PHC clinicians working outside general practice. The aim of this study was to explore the beliefs and attitudes of PHC clinicians about incorporating lifestyle risk factor management into their routine care and to examine whether these varied according to their self reported level of risk factor management.

Methods
A cross sectional survey was undertaken with PHC clinicians (n = 59) in three community health teams. Clinicians' beliefs and attitudes were also explored through qualitative interviews with a purposeful sample of 22 clinicians from the teams. Mixed methods analysis was used to compare beliefs and attitudes for those with high and low levels of self reported risk factor management.

Results
Role congruence, perceived client acceptability, beliefs about capabilities, perceived effectiveness and clinicians' own lifestyle were key themes related to risk factor management practices. Those reporting high levels of risk factor screening and intervention had different beliefs and attitudes to those PHC clinicians who reported lower levels.

Conclusion
PHC clinicians' level of involvement in risk factor management reflects their beliefs and attitudes about it. This provides insights into ways of intervening to improve the integration of behavioural risk factor management into routine practice.

The impact of usability on clinician acceptance of a health information system

The two longitudinal case studies that make up this dissertation sought to explain and predict the relationship between usability and clinician acceptance of a health information system. The overall aim of the research study was to determine what role usability plays in the acceptance or rejection of systems used by clinicians in a healthcare context. The focus was on the end users (the clinicians) rather than the views of the system designers and managers responsible for implementation and the clients of the clinicians. A mixed methods approach was adopted that drew on both qualitative and quantitative research methods. This study followed the implementation of a community health information system from early beginnings to its established practice. Users were drawn from different health service departments with distinctly different organisational cultures and attitudes to information and communication technology used in this context. This study provided evidence that a usability analysis in this context would not necessarily be valid when the users have prior reservations on acceptance. Investigation was made on the initial training and post-implementation support together with a study on the nature of the clinicians to determine factors that may influence their attitude. This research identified that acceptance of a system is not necessarily a measure of its quality, capability and usability, is influenced by the user’s attitude which is determined by outside factors, and the nature and quality of training. The need to recognise the limitations of the current methodologies for analysing usability and acceptance was explored to lay the foundations for further research.

Responding to self-harm in borderline personality disorder : from clinician frustration to therapeutic enquiry

Pessimistic attitudes and reactive behavioural management strategies act as a major barrier to effective service provision for patients with borderline personality disorder. This paper reviews research on countertransference reactions (negative professional attitudes) towards these patients and the professional response to the common presentation of self harm in this particular client group. The psychotherapeutic treatment of patients with borderline personality disorder is complex and both professionally and personally demanding. A clinical framework is proposed that enables clinicians to develop a more nuanced and empathic understanding of self harm within the context of personality disorder in order to facilitate enhanced therapeutic engagement with these challenging patients. A clinical case study illustrates the use of this framework and the potential for enhanced therapeutic management in conjunction with the recognition and reduction of clinician indifference and rejection, thus improving patient outcomes. (editor abstract)Pessimistic attitudes and reactive behavioural management strategies act as a major barrier to effective service provision for patients with borderline personality disorder. This paper reviews research on countertransference reactions (negative professional attitudes) towards these patients and the professional response to the common presentation of self harm in this particular client group. The psychotherapeutic treatment of patients with borderline personality disorder is complex and both professionally and personally demanding. A clinical framework is proposed that enables clinicians to develop a more nuanced and empathic understanding of self harm within the context of personality disorder in order to facilitate enhanced therapeutic engagement with these challenging patients. A clinical case study illustrates the use of this framework and the potential for enhanced therapeutic management in conjunction with the recognition and reduction of clinician indifference and rejection, thus improving patient outcomes.

Professional attitudes towards deliberate self-harm in patients with borderline personality disorder

Objective: The aim of the present study was to assess the attitudes of mental health and emergency medicine clinicians towards patients diagnosed with borderline personality disorder. The clinician gender, primary occupation and service setting, level of university training and years of experience, frequency of clinical contact, and completion of specific training in borderline personality disorder were expected to influence the attitudes of health professionals towards working with borderline patients that engage in self-harm.

Method: A purpose-designed questionnaire and an assessment tool to quantify attitudinal levels were used to collect demographic information and assess the attitudes of 140 mental health and emergency medicine practitioners across two Australian health services and a New Zealand health service.

Results: Statistically and clinically significant differences were found between emergency medical staff and mental health clinicians in their attitudes towards working with borderline personality disorder. The strongest predictor of attitudes was whether the clinician worked in emergency medicine or mental health. This was followed by years of experience and specific training in personality disorders as significant predictors of attitudes to self-harm.

Conclusions: The implications of these findings for the professional training of clinicians in the management and treatment of borderline personality disorder patients are discussed.

Association between clinician factors and a patient's wish to hasten death: Terminally ill cancer patients and their doctors

This study investigated the clinical factors associated with a wish to hasten death among patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care, with a focus on the role of clinician-related factors. Patients were grouped into high- and low-scoring groups on the basis of their wish to hasten death; doctor-patient pairs were formed. Questionnaire data collected from patients and their treating doctors were subjected to multivariate analysis. Significant predictors of a high wish to hasten death in terminally ill patients from among treating clinicians included the clinician's perception of the patient's lower optimism and greater emotional suffering, the patient indicating a wish to hasten death, the doctor willing to assist the patient in hastening death (if requested and legal), and the doctor reporting less training in psychotherapy. When these variables were combined with patient factors identified in a previous study, the model significantly predicted a wish to hasten death with the following variables patient factors: a higher perceived burden on others, higher depressive symptom scores, and lower family cohesion; physician factors: the doctor willing to assist the patient in hastening death (if requested and legal), the doctor's perception of lower levels of optimism and greater emotional distress in the patient, and the doctor having less training in psychotherapy; and the setting of care: recent admission to a hospice. The findings support the multifactorial influences on the wish to hasten death and suggest that the role of the clinician is a vital context within which the wish to hasten death should be considered.