Table 2.

Associations of Diabetes Process Measures with Payment Methodology

	Process Measure
Payment Methodology	Glycemic Control Assessed (N = 6,015) (86%)*	Lipid Profile Assessed (N = 5,797) (69%)*	Proteinuria Assessed (N = 6,025) (78%)*	Dilated Eye Exam (N = 6,024) (79%)*	Foot Exam (N = 6,024) (84%)*	Advised to Take Aspirin (N = 6,023) (55%)*	Influenza Immunization (N = 5,971) (67%)*
Full model
High direct salary (versus high FFS)	1.13	1.03	1.23	1.13	1.18	1.12	1.07
	(1.04, 1.28)	(0.85, 1.29)	(1.07, 1.50)	(1.02, 1.29)	(1.04, 1.41)	(0.89, 1.44)	(0.95, 1.23)
High direct salary (versus high capitation)	1.06	1.14	1.28	1.17	1.12	1.14	1.36
	(1.00, 1.16)	(0.98, 1.36)	(1.12, 1.51)	(1.06, 1.32)	(1.04, 1.25)	(1.00, 1.31)	(1.18, 1.59)
Expanded model
High direct salary (versus high FFS)	1.02	1.09	1.17	1.18	1.18	1.01	1.02
	(0.93, 1.14)	(0.80, 1.55)	(0.96, 1.47)	(1.00, 1.44)	(0.97, 1.54)	(0.73, 1.41)	(0.87, 1.22)
High direct salary (versus high capitation)	0.95	1.26	1.16	1.26	1.11	0.97	1.22
	(0.87, 1.04)	(0.86, 2.01)	(0.93, 1.57)	(1.02, 1.68)	(0.93, 1.44)	(0.71, 1.39)	(0.95, 1.64)

Notes:

^*Denotes the percentage of study participants receiving the element of care. Figures shown in table are relative risks and 95% simulated confidence intervals based on multilevel logistic regressions with random health plan and provider group intercepts. Bolded estimates denote statistical significance at the 5% level based on three decimal places. The full model controlled for whether the dominant mode of provider payment was high direct salary (≥60% of compensation from direct salary), high FFS (≥60% FFS), high capitation (≥60% from fixed capitation), or mixed methods. The expanded model added organizational model (MG versus IPA). All regressions adjusted for the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the patients.

FFS, fee-for-service; MG, medical group; IPA, independent practice association.