• Health Policy and Government Relations
• Contact Congress - Take Legislative Action
• SVS Health Policy Committee Meets with Senators/Staff
• Priority Issues
• Imaging Cuts
• SAAAVE Act
• Physician Payment
• Pay For Performance (P4P)
• Fistula First Initiative
• Reimbursement
• Regulatory Issues
• Political Action Committee
• 111th Congress Committee Assignments
• SVS Position Statements

P4P: References

1. Hsiao WC, Braun P, Dunn D, Becker ER, DeNicola M, Ketcham TR. Results and policy implications of the resource-based relative-value study. N Engl J Med 1988;319:881-8.

2. Hackbarth GM. MedPAC recommendations on physician payment policy: statement to the Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives. February 28, 2002.

3. Available at: URL: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/apps/media/press/release.asp?Counter=1846.

4. American Medical Association Division of Market Research. Physicians’ reactions to the projected Medicare physician payment cuts. March 2006. AMA Survey.

5. Fried BJ, Thomas MS, Goodrech LL. Human resource management. In: Keagy BA, Thomas MS, editors. Essentials of physician practice management. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2004. p. 286-7.

6. Rosenthal MB, Frank RG, Li Z, Epstein AM. Early experience with pay-for-performance: from concept to practice. JAMA 2005;294: 1788-93.

7. Passaro E, Organ CH Jr. Ernest A. Codman: the improper Bostonian. Bull Am Coll Surg 1999;84:16-22.

8. Hanlon CR. The American College of Surgeons at 90. Bull Am Coll Surg 2003;88:19-25.

9. Kohn LT, Corrigan J, Donaldson MS, editors. To err is human: building a safer health system. Committee on Quality of Health Care in American, Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000.

10. United States Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.

11. US Institute of Medicine. Performance measurement: accelerating improvement. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2006.

12. Jencks SF, Wilensky GR. The health care quality improvement initiative: a new approach to quality assurance in Medicare. JAMA 1992;268:900-3.

13. Available at: URL: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/HospitalQualityInits/35_HospitalPremier.asp.

14. Spotswood S. HHS seeks nationwide health IT architecture. US Med 2005;41:8-9.

15. Available at: URL: http://www.ambulatoryqualityalliance.org/about.htm.

16. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson WG. The comparative assessment and improvement in the quality of surgical care in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Arch Surg 2002;137:20-7.

17. Young GJ, Chams MP, Daley J, Forbes MG, Henderson WG, Khuri SF. Best practices for managing surgical services: the role of coordination. J Health Care Manage Rev 1997;22:85-99.

18. Young GJ, Chams MP, Desai K, et al. Patterns of coordination and clinical outcomes: a study of surgical services. Health Serv Res 1998; 33:1211-36.

19. Frei R. Michigan paying docs to track outcomes. Gen Surg News 2006;33:1, 18.

20. Harris JA, Cebuhar B. The next step for quality measurement: paying for it! Bull Am Coll Surg 2004;89:8-11.

21. Available at: URL: http://www.vascularweb.org/vascularregistry.

22. Splete H. Doctors should be the drivers of performance measures. Surg News 2006;2:5.

Reprinted from Journal of Vascular Surgery, Volume 44, Number 4, October 2006, Anton M. Sidawy, MD, MPH, Washington, D.C., "Pay for Performance: The process and its evolution," 892-902, Copyright 2006, with permission from The Society for Vascular Surgery.

Journal of Vascular Surgery (http://www.jvascsurg.org)