Financial Incentives to Translate ALLHAT Into Practice: A Randomized Trial

NCT ID: NCT00302718

Last Updated: 2019-01-30

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

83 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2007-02-28

Study Completion Date

2012-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether financial incentives for guideline-recommended treatment of hypertension are effective. We hypothesized that patients with hypertension cared for by physicians or practice groups receiving financial incentives were more likely to be prescribed guideline-recommended anti-hypertensive medications and achieve Joint National Commission (JNC) 7 guideline-recommended blood pressure goals compared to patients who were treated by providers that did not receive financial incentives.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Background:

Despite compelling evidence of the benefits of treatment, hypertension is controlled in less than one-quarter of US citizens. Using a cluster randomized controlled trial, we tested the effect of explicit physician-level and practice-level financial incentives to promote the provision of guideline-recommended anti-hypertensive medications and improved control of hypertension in the VA primary care setting.

Objectives:

The goals were to: (1) determine the effect of physician-level financial incentives on processes and outcomes of care for outpatients with hypertension; (2) assess the impact of practice-level incentives; (3) ascertain whether there were additive or synergistic effects of physician- and practice-level incentives; (4) evaluate the persistence of the effect of incentives after the intervention ceases; and (5) identify any negative impacts of incentives on patients, providers, or health care organizations.

Methods:

We randomized 12 VA hospital-based outpatient clinics to the following arms: (1) physician-level incentives; (2) practice-level incentives; (3) physician- and practice-level incentives; and (4) no incentives. We enrolled 83 primary care physicians and 42 practice group members (e.g., nurses). All participants received audit and feedback performance reports. Study measures included the use of guideline-recommended anti-hypertensive medications and the proportion of patients who achieved national (JNC 7) guideline-recommended blood pressure goals or received an appropriate response to uncontrolled blood pressure. The intervention period consisted of five four-month performance periods. For each period, trained reviewers collected medications, blood pressure readings, comorbid conditions, medication allergies, and lifestyle recommendations from the VA electronic health record system for a sample of eligible patients from the physicians' panels. After the final performance report, we implemented a 12-month washout period. To determine the impact of incentives for the intervention period, we performed a repeated-measures longitudinal analysis using the hospital as a random effect. We evaluated the rate of change in the proportion of patients who met the study measures over time for the intervention group physicians. We assessed post-washout performance using a linear analysis with clustering by hospital. To evaluate unintended consequences of the incentives, we examined the incidence of hypotension in the physicians' panels.

Status:

The study is completed. The primary findings were published in September 2013 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). We are currently preparing manuscripts describing findings from the study's secondary aims.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Hypertension

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Physician-level incentives

Examines the effect of physician-level financial incentives on hypertension quality of care

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Physician-level financial incentives

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Enrolled physician participants are eligible to receive financial incentives and audit and feedback reports based on their performance during a 4-month interval on the hypertension care study outcomes.

Practice-level incentives

Examines the effect of practice-level financial incentives on hypertension quality of care

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Practice-level financial incentives

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Enrolled practices (physician physicians and non-physician primary care personnel) are eligible to receive financial incentives and audit and feedback reports based on the performance of the practice during a 4-month interval on the hypertension care study outcomes.

Physician- and practice-level incentives

Examines the effect of physician- and practice-level financial incentives on hypertension quality of care

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Physician- and practice-level financial incentives

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Enrolled participants are eligible to receive financial incentives and audit and feedback reports based on performance during a 4-month interval on the hypertension care study outcomes. This arm tests the effect of combined financial incentives (physician-level incentives and practice-level incentives).

No incentives (control)

Physician participants in this arm received only audit and feedback performance reports as did the participants in the intervention arms.

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Physician-level financial incentives

Enrolled physician participants are eligible to receive financial incentives and audit and feedback reports based on their performance during a 4-month interval on the hypertension care study outcomes.

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Practice-level financial incentives

Enrolled practices (physician physicians and non-physician primary care personnel) are eligible to receive financial incentives and audit and feedback reports based on the performance of the practice during a 4-month interval on the hypertension care study outcomes.

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Physician- and practice-level financial incentives

Enrolled participants are eligible to receive financial incentives and audit and feedback reports based on performance during a 4-month interval on the hypertension care study outcomes. This arm tests the effect of combined financial incentives (physician-level incentives and practice-level incentives).

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

Study participants had to be full-time primary care physicians employed by the Veterans Health Administration (VA) at one of the 12 VA hospitals that participated in the study.

We defined a full-time primary care physician as spending at least 0.60 full-time equivalent (FTE) delivering patient care services in the primary care setting or having a panel size of at least 500 patients at the time of study arm randomization. The primary care settings included internal medicine, primary care medical clinics, and women's health care clinics. The trial did not actively recruit patients into the study. This study retrospectively reviewed a random sample of health records of eligible patients that had clinical encounters with the physician participants.

Exclusion Criteria

The study did not include VA physicians that were trainees.
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)

NIH

Sponsor Role collaborator

VA Office of Research and Development

FED

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Laura A. Petersen, MD MPH

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

VA Medical Center, Birmingham

Birmingham, Alabama, United States

Site Status

VA Connecticut Health Care System (Newington)

Newington, Connecticut, United States

Site Status

VA Medical Center, Augusta

Augusta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

VA Medical Center, Jamaica Plain Campus

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

John D. Dingell VA Medical Center, Detroit

Detroit, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Aleda E. Lutz VA Medical Center

Saginaw, Michigan, United States

Site Status

VA Medical Center, Minneapolis

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

G.V. (Sonny) Montgomery VA Medical Center, Jackson

Jackson, Mississippi, United States

Site Status

VA Medical Center, Oklahoma City

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States

Site Status

VA Medical Center, Providence

Providence, Rhode Island, United States

Site Status

Ralph H Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston

Charleston, South Carolina, United States

Site Status

Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Petersen LA, Simpson K, Pietz K, Urech TH, Hysong SJ, Profit J, Conrad DA, Dudley RA, Woodard LD. Effects of individual physician-level and practice-level financial incentives on hypertension care: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2013 Sep 11;310(10):1042-50. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.276303.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 24026599 (View on PubMed)

Hysong SJ, Simpson K, Pietz K, SoRelle R, Broussard Smitham K, Petersen LA. Financial incentives and physician commitment to guideline-recommended hypertension management. Am J Manag Care. 2012 Oct 1;18(10):e378-91.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 23145846 (View on PubMed)

Petersen LA, Woodard LD, Urech TH. Financial incentives to control hypertension in patients--reply. JAMA. 2014 Jan 15;311(3):303-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.284315. No abstract available.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 24430324 (View on PubMed)

Woodard LD, Landrum CR, Urech TH, Wang D, Virani SS, Petersen LA. Impact of clinical complexity on the quality of diabetes care. Am J Manag Care. 2012 Sep;18(9):508-14.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 23009301 (View on PubMed)

Petersen LA, Simpson K, Sorelle R, Urech T, Chitwood SS. How variability in the institutional review board review process affects minimal-risk multisite health services research. Ann Intern Med. 2012 May 15;156(10):728-35. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-10-201205150-00011.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 22586010 (View on PubMed)

Woodard LD, Urech T, Landrum CR, Wang D, Petersen LA. Impact of comorbidity type on measures of quality for diabetes care. Med Care. 2011 Jun;49(6):605-10. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31820f0ed0.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 21422952 (View on PubMed)

Virani SS, Steinberg L, Murray T, Negi S, Nambi V, Woodard LD, Bozkurt B, Petersen LA, Ballantyne CM. Barriers to non-HDL cholesterol goal attainment by providers. Am J Med. 2011 Sep;124(9):876-80.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.02.012.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 21854896 (View on PubMed)

Petersen LA, Urech T, Simpson K, Pietz K, Hysong SJ, Profit J, Conrad D, Dudley RA, Lutschg MZ, Petzel R, Woodard LD. Design, rationale, and baseline characteristics of a cluster randomized controlled trial of pay for performance for hypertension treatment: study protocol. Implement Sci. 2011 Oct 3;6:114. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-114.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 21967830 (View on PubMed)

Petersen LA. Pay for performance in myocardial infarction: are we reaping the rewards? Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2008 Mar;5(3):134-5. doi: 10.1038/ncpcardio1069. Epub 2007 Dec 4. No abstract available.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 18059383 (View on PubMed)

Van Swol MA. Does pay-for-performance improve the quality of health care? Ann Intern Med. 2007 Apr 3;146(7):538; author reply 538-9. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-146-7-200704030-00015. No abstract available.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 17404361 (View on PubMed)

Petersen LA, Urech TH, Byrne MM, Pietz K. Do financial incentives in a globally budgeted healthcare payment system produce changes in the way patients are categorized? A five-year study. Am J Manag Care. 2007 Sep;13(9):513-22.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 17803365 (View on PubMed)

Petersen LA, Simpson K, Urech T, Woodard L, Hysong S, Dudley RA. Do financial incentives to health care providers generate greater interest in adhering to performance measures than audit and feedback alone. Journal of general internal medicine. 2009 Apr 1; 24(S1):S58-S59.

Reference Type RESULT

Petersen LA, Woodard LD, Henderson LM, Urech TH, Pietz K. Will hypertension performance measures used for pay-for-performance programs penalize those who care for medically complex patients? Circulation. 2009 Jun 16;119(23):2978-85. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.836544. Epub 2009 Jun 1.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 19487595 (View on PubMed)

Woodard LD, Petersen LA. Improving the performance of performance measurement. J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Feb;25(2):100-1. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1198-z. No abstract available.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 19953336 (View on PubMed)

Petersen LA, Woodard LD, Urech T, Daw C, Sookanan S. Does pay-for-performance improve the quality of health care? Ann Intern Med. 2006 Aug 15;145(4):265-72. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-4-200608150-00006.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 16908917 (View on PubMed)

Hysong SJ, Kell HJ, Petersen LA, Campbell BA, Trautner BW. Theory-based and evidence-based design of audit and feedback programmes: examples from two clinical intervention studies. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 Apr;26(4):323-334. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004796. Epub 2016 Jun 10.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 27288054 (View on PubMed)

Petersen LA, Ramos KS, Pietz K, Woodard LD. Impact of a Pay-for-Performance Program on Care for Black Patients with Hypertension: Important Answers in the Era of the Affordable Care Act. Health Serv Res. 2017 Jun;52(3):1138-1155. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12517. Epub 2016 Jun 22.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 27329344 (View on PubMed)

Hysong SJ, SoRelle R, Broussard Smitham K, Petersen LA. Reports of unintended consequences of financial incentives to improve management of hypertension. PLoS One. 2017 Sep 21;12(9):e0184856. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184856. eCollection 2017.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 28934258 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

R01HL079173

Identifier Type: NIH

Identifier Source: secondary_id

View Link

IIR 04-349

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.