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

• Published in: BMC health services research Vol. 16; no. 1; p. 324
• Main Authors: Carter, Renee, Riverin, Bruno, Levesque, Jean-Frédéric, Gariepy, Geneviève, Quesnel-Vallée, Amélie
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 30-07-2016; BioMed Central
• Subjects: Analysis; Bias; Canada; Chronic illnesses; Cross-sectional studies; Diabetes Mellitus - therapy; Emergency Medical Services - utilization; Health Care Reform; Health services; Health Services - utilization; Hospitalization - statistics & numerical data; Humans; Intervention; Medical care; Medical personnel; Medical practices; Organizational change; Patient Care Team; Physicians; Primary care; Primary health care; Primary Health Care - organization & administration; Productivity; Quality; Quality management; Reforms; Reimbursement Mechanisms; Systematic review; Teams; Trends; Canada; Canada; Primary care reform; Team-based practice; Payment models
• ISSN: 1472-6963; 1472-6963
• DOI: 10.1186/s12913-016-1571-7

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.
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.
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.
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.