We have one incident where a pilot crashed a plane, which doesn't seem to equate to the entire aviation safety system being irretrievably broken. We had people knowing that pilot was depressed, but I'm not aware of him repeatedly telling people he was going to do something terrible nd take the lives of innocents one day soon.
We also have evidence that enacting checklists in hospitals (a la the Checklist Manifesto) didn't actually change much in practice, at least as currently implemented, so what works for aviation safety may not be directly analogous to what works in hospital safety, which is a rather different question in any event as to how to provide safe, cost-effective care. (One could safely perform a lot of pointless knee and heart surgery, for example, with low complication rates, that didn't provide any significant benefit in the first place.)
I think the idea of paying physicians for quality rather than quantity is a good one. There are plenty of honest physicians who don't game the current system (and in the realm of primary care it's not easy - your pediatrician can't schedule too many extra checkups for profit) but there are others who convince themselves that offering patients what they want, even if it's expensive and the evidence isn't great is giving the customer what they want.
Developing accurate measures of quality and utility and risk adjustment is not going to be easy, and the pathway is littered with mistakes. Us primary care physicians were tasked up until the last couple of years to keep our diabetics in tight control, until we just recently figured out that probably did more harm than good for most people. That's science for you: the questions tend to stay the same, but the answers keep changing. We may be bumbling forward, but it does seem to be (generally) forward.