Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Archives
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Archives
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Effect of Financial Incentives on Improvement in Medical Quality Indicators for Primary Care

Thomas F. Gavagan, Hongyan Du, Barry G. Saver, Gerald J. Adams, Douglas M. Graham, Regina McCray and G. Ken Goodrick
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine September 2010, 23 (5) 622-631; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2010.05.070187
Thomas F. Gavagan
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hongyan Du
MS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Barry G. Saver
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gerald J. Adams
EdD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Douglas M. Graham
BA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Regina McCray
RN, BSN
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G. Ken Goodrick
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 1.

    Observed and linear mixed model estimated percent of meeting Papanicolaou criterion by group over time.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 2.

    Observed and linear mixed model estimated percent of meeting mammography criterion by group over time.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 3.

    Observed and linear mixed model estimated percent of meeting pediatric immunization criterion by group over time.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Papanicolaou Smears: Chart Reviewed and Percent of Meeting Criterion by Center by Time

    TimeNonincentivized Group*Incentivized Group†P‡
    Total Charts Reviewed (n)Charts Meeting Criterion (n [%])Total Charts Reviewed (n)Charts Meeting Criterion (n [%])
    2003
        1st quarter405361 (89.14)443361 (81.49).187
        2nd quarter10286 (84.31)356307 (86.24).545
        3rd quarter236215 (91.10)389317 (81.49).010
        4th quarter387358 (92.51)450358 (79.56).002
    2004
        1st quarter235210 (89.36)278237 (85.25).362
        2nd quarter251234 (93.23)289253 (87.54).214
        3rd quarter199187 (93.97)270241 (89.26).078
        4th quarter167147 (88.02)209192 (91.87).316
    2005
        1st quarter246224 (91.06)435402 (92.41).390
        2nd quarter222163 (73.42)404365 (90.35).0003
        3 rd quarter237180 (75.95)420394 (93.81)<.0001
        4th quarter285227 (79.65)423400 (94.56)<.0001
    2006
        1st quarter291258 (88.66)392361 (92.09).087
        2nd quarter328296 (90.24)417374 (89.69).922
        3rd quarter332294 (88.55)425387 (91.06).462
        4th quarter242222 (91.74)305290 (95.08).089
    2007
        1st quarter152128 (84.21)335301 (89.85).573
        2nd quarter282252 (89.36)427387 (90.63).686
        3rd quarter280240 (85.71)421384 (91.21).420
        4th quarter205187 (91.22)323296 (91.64).844
    • * Nonincentivized had a higher percent of meeting Papanicolaou criterion during some early time periods: 3rd and 4th quarters of 2003 (P < .05 for all).

    • † Incentivized had a higher percent of meeting Papanicolaou criterion during some late time periods: 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quarters of 2005 (P < .05 for all).

    • ‡ Within-clinic clustering adjusted.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Mammography: Chart Reviewed and Percent of Meeting Criterion by Center by Time

    TimeNonincentivized GroupIncentivized GroupP*
    Total Charts Reviewed (n)Charts Meeting Criterion (n [%])Total Charts Reviewed (n)Charts Meeting Criterion (n [%])
    2003
        1st quarter571518 (90.72)651603 (92.63).366
        2nd quarter134121 (90.30)535479 (89.53).545
        3rd quarter392359 (91.58)638579 (90.75).588
        4th quarter615575 (93.50)669609 (91.03).227
    2004
        1st quarter242222 (91.74)268253 (94.40).985
        2nd quarter223211 (94.62)298281 (94.30).796
        3rd quarter224210 (93.75)301281 (93.36).668
        4th quarter114109 (95.61)153144 (94.12).494
    2005
        1st quarter267256 (95.88)370359 (97.03).552
        2nd quarter339300 (88.50)421405 (96.20).002
        3rd quarter338300 (88.76)429418 (97.44).011
        4th quarter299272 (90.97)369363 (98.37).0008
    2006
        1st quarter314281 (89.49)404398 (98.51)<.0001
        2nd quarter350324 (92.57)414401 (96.86).048
        3rd quarter344313 (90.99)422410 (97.16).026
        4th quarter288258 (89.58)192184 (95.83).196
    2007
        1st quarter272251 (92.28)363343 (94.49).463
        2nd quarter350326 (93.14)448428 (95.54).260
        3rd quarter350339 (96.86)420403 (95.95).600
        4th quarter250240 (96.00)279273 (97.85).288
    • No difference was found between nonincentivized and incentivized before 2nd quarter 2005, whereas incentivized had a higher percent of meeting mammography criterion from 2nd quarter 2005 to 3rd quarter 2006 (P < .05 for all); no difference was found in 2007.

    • * Within-clinic clustering adjusted.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Pediatric Immunization: Chart Reviewed and Percent of Meeting Criterion by Center by Time

    TimeNonincentivized GroupIncentivized GroupP*
    Total Charts Reviewed (n)Charts Meeting Criterion (n [%])Total Charts Reviewed (n)Charts Meeting Criterion (n [%])
    2001
        1st quarter3029 (96.67)226221 (97.79).582
        2nd quarter5451 (94.44)272268 (98.53).139
        3rd quarter7253 (73.61)248244 (98.39)<.0001
        4th quarter8760 (68.97)316290 (91.77).055
    2002
        1st quarter189135 (71.43)403359 (89.08).013
        2nd quarter5237 (71.15)149137 (91.95).002
        3rd quarter207181 (87.44)458425 (92.79).056
        4th quarter211181 (85.78)493462 (93.71).017
    2003
        1st quarter207163 (78.74)488331 (67.83).092
        2nd quarter159118 (74.21)279221 (79.21).636
        3rd quarter208163 (78.37)405302 (74.57).775
        4th quarter216174 (80.56)495371 (74.95).853
    2004
        1st quarter219191 (87.21)511406 (79.45).830
        2nd quarter179151 (84.36)489472 (96.52).0001
        3rd quarter228202 (88.60)488482 (98.77)<.0001
        4th quarter224201 (89.73)320316 (98.75)<.0001
    • No difference was found between nonincentivized and incentivized groups in the 1st and 2nd quarters of 2001. The incentivized group had a higher percent of meeting pediatric immunization criterion during the 3rd quarter of 2001; the 1st, 2nd, and 4th quarters of 2002 (P < .05 for all); and the 2nd to 4th quarters of 2004 (P < .05 for all).

    • * Within-clinic clustering adjusted.

    • View popup
    Table 4.

    Incentive Pay for Incentivized Physicians

    YearMean per Full Time Equivalent (US$)Median (US$)
    200239053900
    200358414834
    200479046300
    200591466504
    200686176100
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine: 23 (5)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 23, Issue 5
September-October 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Effect of Financial Incentives on Improvement in Medical Quality Indicators for Primary Care
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 12 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Effect of Financial Incentives on Improvement in Medical Quality Indicators for Primary Care
Thomas F. Gavagan, Hongyan Du, Barry G. Saver, Gerald J. Adams, Douglas M. Graham, Regina McCray, G. Ken Goodrick
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Sep 2010, 23 (5) 622-631; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2010.05.070187

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Effect of Financial Incentives on Improvement in Medical Quality Indicators for Primary Care
Thomas F. Gavagan, Hongyan Du, Barry G. Saver, Gerald J. Adams, Douglas M. Graham, Regina McCray, G. Ken Goodrick
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Sep 2010, 23 (5) 622-631; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2010.05.070187
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Are Pediatric Quality Care Measures Too Stringent?
  • The Words We Use, the Procedures We Do, and How We Change (Medical Care Information for Family Physicians)
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Identifying and Addressing Social Determinants of Health with an Electronic Health Record
  • Integrating Adverse Childhood Experiences and Social Risks Screening in Adult Primary Care
  • A Pilot Comparison of Clinical Data Collection Methods Using Paper, Electronic Health Record Prompt, and a Smartphone Application
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire