The DOI matches its Crossref record.
How Do Financial Incentives Affect Physicians' Clinical Decisions and the Financial Performance of Health Maintenance Organizations?
Abstract
It has been suggested that the use of financial incentives by health maintenance organizations (HMOs) may change physicians' behavior toward individual patients. To test this hypothesis, we used a regression analysis of data from a survey of HMOs to examine the relation between the presence of financial incentives and two measures of the use of resources (the rate of hospitalization and the rate of visits for outpatient services) and one measure of the HMOs' financial viability (the achievement of break-even status). When we controlled for the effect of market-area variables, we found that some forms of compensation were significantly associated with these indicators of decision making by physicians. Among methods of paying physicians, the use of capitation or salaries was associated with a lower rate of hospitalization than the use of fee-for-service payment; physicians in for-profit HMOs and group-model HMOs also used the hospital less often. Placing physicians at financial risk as individuals and imposing penalties for deficits in the HMO's hospital fund beyond the loss of withheld funds were associated with fewer outpatient visits per enrollee, but a higher percentage of HMO patients in a physician's caseload was associated with more frequent visits. HMOs were more likely to break even if they were larger, older, had physicians who treated more HMO patients, and placed physicians at personal financial risk for the cost of outpatient tests; break-even status was also related to the type of HMO. We conclude that the use of some, but not all, financial incentives, as well as the type of HMO, does influence the behavior of physicians toward patients. It remains to be determined how these factors affect the quality of care.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Understanding Financial Conflicts of Interest
Thompson, D. F. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199308193290812 · Cited by 854
Time allocation in primary care office visits
Tai‐Seale, M., McGuire, T. G., & Zhang, W. (2007) · Health Services Research · doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00689.x · Cited by 472
The Impact of Peer Management on Test-Ordering Behavior
Neilson, E. G., Johnson, K. B., Rosenbloom, S. T., Dupont, W. D., Talbert, D., Giuse, D. A., Kaiser, A., Miller, R. A., & and the Resource Utilization Committee* (2004) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-141-3-200408030-00008 · Cited by 147
Egmond, S., Wakkee, M., Rengen, A., Bastiaens, M. T., Nijsten, T., & Lugtenberg, M. (2019) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/bjd.17594 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Hillman, A. L., Pauly, M. V., & Kerstein, J. J.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1989-07-13
- Volume
- 321
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 86-92
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2078043209
- Cited by
- 470
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 59.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How Do Financial Incentives Affect Physicians' Clinical Decisions and the Financial Performance of Health Maintenance Organizations? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm198907133210205
- The paper
- Hillman, A. L., Pauly, M. V., & Kerstein, J. J. (1989). How Do Financial Incentives Affect Physicians' Clinical Decisions and the Financial Performance of Health Maintenance Organizations? New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198907133210205
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.