Patients' views of pay for performance in primary care: a qualitative study.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many countries use pay-for-performance schemes to reward family practices financially for achieving quality indicators. The views of patients on pay for performance remain largely unexplored. AIM: To gain the views of family practice patients on the United Kingdom pay-for-performance Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF). DESIGN AND SETTING: Interviews with 52 patients were conducted in 15 family practices across England. All patients had at least one long-term condition that had been diagnosed before the introduction of the QOF in 2004. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews analysed using open explorative thematic coding. RESULTS: Few patients had heard of the QOF or had noticed changes to the structure or process of their care. However, where they were noted, changes to consultations such as increased use of computers and health checks initiated by the GP or practice nurse were seen as good practice. The majority of patients were surprised to hear their practice received bonuses for doing 'simple things'. Some patients also raised concerns over potential unintended consequences of pay-for-performance frameworks, such as a reduced focus on non-incentivised areas. CONCLUSION: This study adds a unique patient perspective to the debate around the impact of pay-for-performance schemes and consequences on patient care. Patients' views, experiences, and concerns about pay for performance mostly chime with previously described opinions of primary care staff. Patient surprise and concern around incentivising basic processes of care shows how patient views are vital when monitoring and evaluating a scheme that is designed to improve patient care.