Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

The impact of primary care reform on health system performance in Canada: a systematic review

Authors: Renee Carter, Bruno Riverin, Jean-Frédéric Levesque, Geneviève Gariepy, Amélie Quesnel-Vallée

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

We aimed to synthesize the evidence of a causal effect and draw inferences about whether Canadian primary care reforms improved health system performance based on measures of health service utilization, processes of care, and physician productivity.

Methods

We searched the Embase, PubMed and Web of Science databases for records from 2000 to September 2015. We based our risk of bias assessment on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines. Full-text studies were synthesized and organized according to the three outcome categories: health service utilization, processes of care, and physician costs and productivity.

Results

We found moderate quality evidence that team-based models of care led to reductions in emergency department use, but the evidence was mixed for hospital admissions. We also found low quality evidence that team-based models, blended capitation models and pay-for-performance incentives led to small and sometimes non-significant improvements in processes of care. Studies examining new payment models on physician costs and productivity were of high methodological quality and provided a coherent body of evidence assessing enhanced fee-for-service and blended capitation payment models.

Conclusion

A small number of studies suggested that team-based models contributed to reductions in emergency department use in Quebec and Alberta. Regarding processes of diabetes care, studies found higher rates of testing for blood glucose levels, retinopathy and cholesterol in Alberta’s team-based primary care model and in practices eligible for pay-for-performance incentives in Ontario. However pay-for-performance in Ontario was found to have null to moderate effects on other prevention and screening activities. Although blended capitation payment in Ontario contributed to decreases in the number of services delivered and patients seen per day, the number of enrolled patients and number of days worked in a year was similar to that of enhanced fee-for-service practices.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Aggarwal, M. and B. Hutchison, Toward a primary care strategy for Canada. 2012, Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement Aggarwal, M. and B. Hutchison, Toward a primary care strategy for Canada. 2012, Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement
4.
go back to reference Merrell K, Berenson RA. Structuring Payment For Medical Homes. Health Aff. 2010;29(5):852–8.CrossRef Merrell K, Berenson RA. Structuring Payment For Medical Homes. Health Aff. 2010;29(5):852–8.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Suter E, et al. Comparative review of the policy landscape of team-based primary health care service delivery in western Canada. Alberta: Alberta Health Services. 2014. Suter E, et al. Comparative review of the policy landscape of team-based primary health care service delivery in western Canada. Alberta: Alberta Health Services. 2014.
6.
go back to reference Strumpf E, et al. Innovative and diverse strategies toward primary health care reform: lessons learned from the Canadian experience. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012;25 Suppl 1:S27–33.CrossRefPubMed Strumpf E, et al. Innovative and diverse strategies toward primary health care reform: lessons learned from the Canadian experience. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012;25 Suppl 1:S27–33.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Moher D, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264–9. w64.CrossRefPubMed Moher D, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264–9. w64.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, et al. GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):407–15.CrossRefPubMed Guyatt GH, et al. GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):407–15.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group. Data Collection Checklist. In: Mayhew A, editor. Ottawa: University of Ottawa; 2002. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group. Data Collection Checklist. In: Mayhew A, editor. Ottawa: University of Ottawa; 2002.
10.
go back to reference Balshem H, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):401–6.CrossRefPubMed Balshem H, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):401–6.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Li J, et al. PHYSICIAN response to pay-for-performance: Evidence from a natural experiment. Health Econ U K. 2014;23(8):962–78.CrossRef Li J, et al. PHYSICIAN response to pay-for-performance: Evidence from a natural experiment. Health Econ U K. 2014;23(8):962–78.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kantarevic J, Kralj B. Link between pay for performance incentives and physician payment mechanisms: Evidence from the diabetes management incentive in Ontario. Health Econ U K. 2013;22(12):1417–39.CrossRef Kantarevic J, Kralj B. Link between pay for performance incentives and physician payment mechanisms: Evidence from the diabetes management incentive in Ontario. Health Econ U K. 2013;22(12):1417–39.CrossRef
14.
15.
go back to reference Jaakkimainen RL, et al. Did changing primary care delivery models change performance? A population based study using health administrative data. BMC Fam Pract. 2011;12:44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jaakkimainen RL, et al. Did changing primary care delivery models change performance? A population based study using health administrative data. BMC Fam Pract. 2011;12:44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Kantarevic, J. and B. Kralj. Physician payment contracts in the presence of moral hazard and adverse selection: the theory and its application in Ontario. Health economics, 2015: p. n/a-n/a. Kantarevic, J. and B. Kralj. Physician payment contracts in the presence of moral hazard and adverse selection: the theory and its application in Ontario. Health economics, 2015: p. n/a-n/a.
17.
go back to reference Kantarevic J, Kralj B. Risk selection and cost shifting in a prospective physician payment system: Evidence from Ontario. Health Policy. 2014;115(2–3):249–57.CrossRefPubMed Kantarevic J, Kralj B. Risk selection and cost shifting in a prospective physician payment system: Evidence from Ontario. Health Policy. 2014;115(2–3):249–57.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Kralj B, Kantarevic J. Quality and quantity in primary care mixed-payment models: Evidence from family health organizations in Ontario. Can J Econ. 2013;46(1):208–38.CrossRef Kralj B, Kantarevic J. Quality and quantity in primary care mixed-payment models: Evidence from family health organizations in Ontario. Can J Econ. 2013;46(1):208–38.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Kantarevic J, Kralj B, Weinkauf D. Enhanced fee-for-service model and physician productivity: Evidence from Family Health Groups in Ontario. J Health Econ. 2011;30(1):99–111.CrossRefPubMed Kantarevic J, Kralj B, Weinkauf D. Enhanced fee-for-service model and physician productivity: Evidence from Family Health Groups in Ontario. J Health Econ. 2011;30(1):99–111.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
go back to reference Heroux J, et al. Marginal structural models for skewed outcomes: Identifying causal relationships in health care utilization. Stat Med. 2014;33(7):1205–21.CrossRefPubMed Heroux J, et al. Marginal structural models for skewed outcomes: Identifying causal relationships in health care utilization. Stat Med. 2014;33(7):1205–21.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Campbell DJ, et al. Association of enrolment in primary care networks with diabetes care and outcomes among First Nations and low-income Albertans. Open Med. 2012;6(4):e155–65.PubMedPubMedCentral Campbell DJ, et al. Association of enrolment in primary care networks with diabetes care and outcomes among First Nations and low-income Albertans. Open Med. 2012;6(4):e155–65.PubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Levesque JF, et al. Variations in patients' assessment of chronic illness care across organizational models of primary health care: a multilevel cohort analysis. Healthc Policy. 2012;8(2):e108–23.PubMedPubMedCentral Levesque JF, et al. Variations in patients' assessment of chronic illness care across organizational models of primary health care: a multilevel cohort analysis. Healthc Policy. 2012;8(2):e108–23.PubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Feldman DE, et al. Primary healthcare organization and quality-of-life outcomes for persons with chronic disease. Healthc Policy. 2012;7(3):59–72.PubMedPubMedCentral Feldman DE, et al. Primary healthcare organization and quality-of-life outcomes for persons with chronic disease. Healthc Policy. 2012;7(3):59–72.PubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Jackson GL, et al. Improving patient care. The patient centered medical home. A systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):169–78.CrossRefPubMed Jackson GL, et al. Improving patient care. The patient centered medical home. A systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):169–78.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Vérificateur général du Québec. Goupes de médecine de famille et cliniques-réseau. Rapport du Vérificateur général du Québec à l’Assemblée nationale pour l’année 2015-2016. Québec. 2015. Vérificateur général du Québec. Goupes de médecine de famille et cliniques-réseau. Rapport du Vérificateur général du Québec à l’Assemblée nationale pour l’année 2015-2016. Québec. 2015.
29.
go back to reference Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press; 2003. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press; 2003.
30.
go back to reference Mian O, Koren I, Rukholm E. Nurse practitioners in Ontario primary healthcare: Referral patterns and collaboration with other healthcare professionals. J Interprof Care. 2012;26(3):232–9.CrossRefPubMed Mian O, Koren I, Rukholm E. Nurse practitioners in Ontario primary healthcare: Referral patterns and collaboration with other healthcare professionals. J Interprof Care. 2012;26(3):232–9.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Beaulieu M.-D, et al. L’implantation des Groupes de médecine de famille: le défi de la réorganisation de la pratique et de la collaboration interprofessionnelle. Montréal: Université de Montréal. 2006. Beaulieu M.-D, et al. L’implantation des Groupes de médecine de famille: le défi de la réorganisation de la pratique et de la collaboration interprofessionnelle. Montréal: Université de Montréal. 2006.
Metadata
Title
The impact of primary care reform on health system performance in Canada: a systematic review
Authors
Renee Carter
Bruno Riverin
Jean-Frédéric Levesque
Geneviève Gariepy
Amélie Quesnel-Vallée
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1571-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Health Services Research 1/2016 Go to the issue