McBrien, Kerry AlisonSouri, Sepideh2020-09-252020-09-252020-09-24Souri, S. (2020). A comparison between alternative primary care physician payment models: A systematic review and policy analysis (Master's thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada). Retrieved from https://prism.ucalgary.ca.http://hdl.handle.net/1880/112587Objective: Alternative models of primary care physician payment are being considered by policy-makers as a potential way to contain healthcare expenditures. The purpose of this thesis was to synthesize the evidence for alternative primary care physician payment models on quality and economic outcomes worldwide and to make recommendations with respect to payment models that may improve chronic disease management in Canada. Methods: We first conducted a systematic review, searching selected databases from inception to October 2018, for studies that compared primary care physician payment models. There were no restrictions on language, country, or publication date, however studies were restricted to specific study designs (randomized controlled trial, controlled cohort and interrupted time series). A gray literature search was also conducted. The outcomes considered were quality and access to care, patient and physician satisfaction, clinical outcomes, healthcare utilization and costs. Thirteen studies were selected for synthesis, comparing fee-for-service, capitation, incentive payments, and mixed models. We then identified primary care payment methods currently used in Canada through an environmental scan. We applied evidence from the systematic review to evaluate the impact of the three most promising models on quality, utilization, cost, and implementation feasibility, and made a recommendation. Conclusion: Primary care payment models have moved toward incentive payments and mixed models in recent years, and mixed models have promising effects on cost and utilization overall and for managing chronic disease in primary care in Canada. Incentive payments show low sustainability in quality improvements, and a gap in incentivized and non-incentivized aspects of care. Mixed models have been introduced in primary care in Canada. Based on current evidence, the recommended payment model for Canadian primary care physicians that is most likely to optimize chronic disease management is blended capitation. Future studies should focus on long-term quality improvements and improving the quality of non-incentivized activities in incentive models. Further study would help to elucidate the potential benefit of mixed models, in particular their effect on patient-oriented aspects of care: access, continuity, and quality. More studies are needed to understand how blended capitation payment models affect costs and utilization.engUniversity of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission.Primary CarePhysician PaymentSystematic ReviewPolicy AnalysisEconomicsPublic Healthmaster thesis10.11575/PRISM/38247