RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Effect of physician specialist alternative payment plans on administrative health data in Calgary: a validation study JF CMAJ Open FD Canadian Medical Association SP E406 OP E412 DO 10.9778/cmajo.20140116 VO 3 IS 4 A1 Ceara Tess Cunningham A1 Nathalie Jetté A1 Bing Li A1 Ravneet Robyn Dhanoa A1 Brenda Hemmelgarn A1 Tom Noseworthy A1 Cynthia A. Beck A1 Elijah Dixon A1 Susan Samuel A1 William A. Ghali A1 Carolyn DeCoster A1 Hude Quan YR 2015 UL http://www.cmajopen.ca/content/3/4/E406.abstract AB Background: There are concerns that alternate payment plans for physicians may be associated with erosion of data quality, given that physicians are paid regardless of whether claims are submitted. Our objective was to determine the proportion of claims submitted by physician specialists using fee-for-service and alternative payment plans, and to identify and compare the validity of information coded in physician billing claims submitted by these specialists in Calgary. Methods: We conducted a survey of physician specialists to determine their plan status and obtained consent to use physicians' claims data from 4 acute care hospitals in Calgary. Inpatient and emergency department services were identified from the Discharge Abstract Database for Alberta (Canadian Institute for Health Information) and the Alberta Ambulatory Care Classification System database. We linked services to claims by Alberta physicians from 2002 to 2009 by using unique patient and physician identifiers. After identifying the proportion of claims submitted, we reviewed inpatient charts to determine the completeness of submissions as defined by positive predictive value.Results: Of 182 physicians who responded to the survey, 94 (51.6%) used fee-for-service plans exclusively and 51 (28.0%) used alternative payment plans exclusively. Overall completeness of physician submissions for claims was 91.8% for physicians using fee-for-service plans and 90.0% for physicians using alternative payment plans. Submission rate varied by medical specialty (surgery: 92.4% for fee for service v. 88.6% for alternative payment; internal medicine: 94.1% v. 91.3%; neurology: 95.1% v. 91.0%; and pediatrics: 95.1% v. 89.3%). Among claims submitted, the physician accuracies for billing of medical conditions were 87.8% for fee-for-service and 85.0% for alternative payment.Interpretation: Overall submission rates and accuracy in recording diagnoses by physicians who used both plans were high. These findings show that the implementation of alternative payment plan programs in Alberta may not have an impact on the quality of physician claims data.