Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28970260›Full record

ArticleCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2017

Effectiveness of a financial incentive to physicians for timely follow-up after hospital discharge: a population-based time series analysis.

Lauren Lapointe-Shaw, Muhammad Mamdani, Jin Luo, Peter C Austin, Noah M Ivers, Donald A Redelmeier, Chaim M Bell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Aligning innovations in health funding with innovations in care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2018
    Article
  20. Financial incentives for physicians to improve health care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lauren Lapointe-ShawDepartment of Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw, Mamdani, Redelmeier, Bell), University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (Mamdani), St. Michael's Hospital; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Mamdani, Luo, Austin, Ivers, Redelmeier, Bell); Department of Family and Community Medicine (Ivers), University of Toronto; Sinai Health System (Bell); Women's College Hospital (Ivers), Toronto, Ont. lauren.lapointe.shaw@mail.utoronto.ca.
Muhammad MamdaniDepartment of Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw, Mamdani, Redelmeier, Bell), University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (Mamdani), St. Michael's Hospital; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Mamdani, Luo, Austin, Ivers, Redelmeier, Bell); Department of Family and Community Medicine (Ivers), University of Toronto; Sinai Health System (Bell); Women's College Hospital (Ivers), Toronto, Ont.
Jin LuoDepartment of Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw, Mamdani, Redelmeier, Bell), University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (Mamdani), St. Michael's Hospital; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Mamdani, Luo, Austin, Ivers, Redelmeier, Bell); Department of Family and Community Medicine (Ivers), University of Toronto; Sinai Health System (Bell); Women's College Hospital (Ivers), Toronto, Ont.
Peter C AustinDepartment of Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw, Mamdani, Redelmeier, Bell), University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (Mamdani), St. Michael's Hospital; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Mamdani, Luo, Austin, Ivers, Redelmeier, Bell); Department of Family and Community Medicine (Ivers), University of Toronto; Sinai Health System (Bell); Women's College Hospital (Ivers), Toronto, Ont.
Noah M IversDepartment of Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw, Mamdani, Redelmeier, Bell), University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (Mamdani), St. Michael's Hospital; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Mamdani, Luo, Austin, Ivers, Redelmeier, Bell); Department of Family and Community Medicine (Ivers), University of Toronto; Sinai Health System (Bell); Women's College Hospital (Ivers), Toronto, Ont.
Donald A RedelmeierDepartment of Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw, Mamdani, Redelmeier, Bell), University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (Mamdani), St. Michael's Hospital; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Mamdani, Luo, Austin, Ivers, Redelmeier, Bell); Department of Family and Community Medicine (Ivers), University of Toronto; Sinai Health System (Bell); Women's College Hospital (Ivers), Toronto, Ont.
Chaim M BellDepartment of Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw, Mamdani, Redelmeier, Bell), University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (Mamdani), St. Michael's Hospital; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Mamdani, Luo, Austin, Ivers, Redelmeier, Bell); Department of Family and Community Medicine (Ivers), University of Toronto; Sinai Health System (Bell); Women's College Hospital (Ivers), Toronto, Ont.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTimely follow-up after hospital discharge may decrease readmission to hospital. Financial incentives to improve follow-up have been introduced in the United States and Canada, but it is unknown whether they are effective. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of an incentive program on timely physician follow-up after hospital discharge.

methodsWe conducted an interventional time series analysis of all medical and surgical patients who were discharged home from hospital between Apr. 1, 2002, and Jan. 30, 2015, in Ontario, Canada. The intervention was a supplemental billing code for physician follow-up within 14 days of discharge from hospital, introduced in 2006. The primary outcome was an outpatient visit within 14 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes were 7-day follow-up and a composite of emergency department visits, nonelective hospital readmission and death within 14 days.

resultsWe included 8 008 934 patient discharge records. The incentive code was claimed in 31% of eligible visits by 51% of eligible physicians, and cost $17.5 million over the study period. There was no change in the average monthly rate of outcomes in the year before the incentive was introduced compared with the year following introduction: 14-day follow-up (66.5% v. 67.0%, overall

interpretationDespite uptake by physicians, a financial incentive did not alter follow-up after hospital discharge. This lack of effect may be explained by features of the incentive or by extra-physician barriers to follow-up. These barriers should be considered by policymakers before introducing similar initiatives.

Indexed as

Continuity of Patient CarePatient DischargePhysician Incentive PlansAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInterrupted Time Series AnalysisMaleMiddle AgedOntario

Identifiers

PMID28970260
PMCPMC5628034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.