Patient-Chosen Gap Payment: an exploratory qualitative review of patients and general practitioner attitudes toward an alternative funding model for general practice.

Abstract

We explored patients' and GPs' perceptions of an alternative payment system, a Patient-Chosen Gap Payment, where a gap fee is determined by the patient based on their perceived value of the service, including the choice to pay nothing. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews held with GPs (n=10) and patients (n=10) were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed for emerging themes. We found three emergent themes: (1) the cost of quality: health care was difficult to value for both GPs and patients; there was belief in universal coverage and the importance of quality, but trade-offs in quality of care were a common perception; (2) the doctor-patient relationship: patient-centred care was a common goal and perceived as a good measure of quality care and a way for patients to place a value on the service/care; and (3) the business of general practice: participants wanted to see sustainable business models for primary care that incentivised quality of care. A Patient-Chosen Gap Payment (PCGP) funding model could incentivise doctors to provide better care without limiting access to health care. Further research is needed to model real-world application.