Advertisement
ADVANCED SEARCH

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Résumé Abridged Version Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Glazier, R. H. Articles by Sibley, L. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Glazier, R. H. Articles by Sibley, L. M. Related Collections Pay, conditions, numbers Organization of health care Related Articles

Capitation and enhanced fee-for-service models for primary care reform: a population-based evaluation

From the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Glazier, Klein-Geltink, Kopp, Sibley), Toronto, Ont., St. Michael’s Hospital Centre for Research on Inner City Health (Glazier), Toronto, Ont., the Department of Family and Community Medicine and the Dalla Lana School of Public Health (Glazier), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.

Correspondence to: Dr. Richard Glazier, Senior Scientist, Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Rm. G1-06, 2075 Bayview Ave., Toronto ON M4N 3M5; fax 416 480-6048; rick.glazier{at}ices.on.ca

Background: Primary care reform in Ontario, Canada, included the initiation of a blended capitation model in 2001–2002 and an enhanced fee-for-service model in 2003. Both models involve patient rostering, incentives for preventive care and requirements for after-hours care. We evaluated practice characteristics and patterns of care under both models.

Methods: Using administrative data, we identified physicians belonging to either the capitation or the enhanced fee-for-service group throughout the period from Sept. 1, 2005, to Aug. 31, 2006, and their enrolled patients. Practices were stratified by location (urban v. rural). We compared the groups in terms of practice characteristics and patterns of care, including comprehensiveness of care, continuity of care, after-hours care, visits to the emergency department and uptake of new patients.

Results: Patients in the capitation and enhanced fee-for-service practices had similar demographic characteristics. Patients in capitation practices had lower morbidity and comorbidity indices. Comprehensiveness and continuity of care were similar between the 2 groups. Compared with patients in enhanced fee-for-service practices, those in capitation practices had less after-hours care (adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61–0.75) and more visits to emergency departments (adjusted RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.15–1.25). Overall, physicians in the capitation group enrolled fewer new patients than did physicians in the enhanced fee-for-service group (37.0 v. 52.0 per physician); the same was true of new graduates (60.3 v. 72.1 per physician).

Interpretation: Physicians enrolled in the capitation model had different practice characteristics than those in the enhanced fee-for-service model. These characteristics appeared to be pre-existing and not due to enrolment in a new model. Although the capitation model provides an alternative to fee-for-service practice, its characteristics should be the focus of future policy development and research.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Starfield Toward international primary care reform Can. Med. Assoc. J., May 26, 2009; 180(11): 1091 - 1092. [Full Text] [PDF]

HOME	CURRENT ISSUE	PAST ISSUES	COLLECTIONS	HELP	SEARCH
Copyright 1995-2009, Canadian Medical Association. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p) All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association.