A growing hole in the safety net: physician charity care declines again

Continuing a decade-long trend, the proportion of U.S. physicians providing charity care dropped to 68 percent in 2004-05 from 76 percent in 1996-97, according to a national study from the Center for Studying Health System Change (HSC). The ongoing decline in physician charity care is alarming given the increase in the number of uninsured people, particularly during the first half of the decade. Declines in charity care were observed across most major specialties, practice types, practice income levels and geographic regions. Increasing financial pressures and changes in practice arrangements may account in part for the continuing decrease in physician charity care.     

Effect of managed care and financing on practice constraints and career satisfaction in primary care

BACKGROUND: The shift away from third party insurers to risk-sharing arrangements affecting care management and clinicians could be the most fundamental change in the health care system. Analysis was undertaken to study how managed care, practice setting, and financial arrangements affect physicians' perceived impact on their practice. METHODS: Data were taken from the Community Tracking Study (CTS) physician survey, a national survey of active physicians in the United States fielded between August 1996 and August 1997. Survey instruments were completed by 7,146 primary care physicians in internal medicine (2,355), family practice (3,168), and pediatrics (1,623). The dependent variables are career satisfaction and perceived limitations and pressures on time spent with patients, clinical freedom, income, and continuity. To study the unique effect of financing and gatekeeping arrangements and practice setting, the dependent variables were regressed on gatekeeping, practice revenue, individual physician compensation, practice setting, specialty, age-group, sex, international medical graduate, board certification, and recent change in practice ownership. RESULTS: Total managed care revenue, or individual physician incentives, have no effect on career satisfaction and relatively limited effects on time pressure, income pressure, or patient continuity. In contrast, primary care gatekeeping has a highly significant adverse effect on the same outcome measures. After controlling for financial factors, demographic characteristics, and training differences, physicians in solo and 2-physician practices are significantly more likely to be dissatisfied with their medical career, more likely to report no clinical freedom, and more likely to feel income pressure than physicians in group practices, staff model HMOs, medical schools, or other settings. CONCLUSION: Physicians in solo and 2-physician practices were least satisfied with their careers and reported more constraints on their clinical freedom and income than physicians in other settings. Physicians in group practices or staff model HMOs are more likely to report time pressure than physicians in solo or 2-physician practices. Family practice falls between internal medicine (less satisfied, more practice constraints) and pediatrics (more satisfied, fewer practice constraints).     

The differential effect of compensation structures on the likelihood that firms accept new patients by insurance type

Adequate access to primary care is not universally achieved in many countries, including the United States, particularly for vulnerable populations. In this paper we use multiple years of the U.S.-based Community Tracking Survey to examine whether a variety of physician compensation structures chosen by practices influence the likelihood that the practice takes new patients from a variety of different types of insurance. Specifically, we examine the roles of customer satisfaction and quality measures on the one hand, and individual physician productivity measures on the other hand, in determining whether or not firms are more likely to accept patients who have private insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid. In the United States these different types of insurance mechanisms cover populations with different levels of vulnerability. Medicare (elderly and disabled individuals) and Medicaid (low income households) enrollees commonly have lower ability to pay any cost sharing associated with care, are more likely to have multiple comorbidities (and so be more costly to treat), and may be more sensitive to poor access. Further, these two insurers also generally reimburse less generously than private payors. Thus, if lower reimbursements interact with compensation mechanisms to discourage physician practices from accepting new patients, highly vulnerable populations may be at even greater risk than generally appreciated. We control for the potential endogeneity of incentive choice using a multi-level propensity score method. We find that the compensation incentives chosen by practices are statistically and economically significant predictors for the types of new patients that practices accept. These findings have important implications for both policy makers and private health care systems.     

The impact of managed care and practice size on primary care physicians' perceived ability to refer

OBJECTIVES: To identify the determinants of primary care physicians' perceived ability to refer patients, to compare perceived ability to refer between solo/two-physician practices and group practices, and to determine the impact of managed care on perceived ability to refer. METHODS: Multivariate analysis using a dataset derived from the Community Tracking Study Physician Survey, 1996-1997. The variables used to explain physicians' perceived ability to refer included physician and practice characteristics as well as aspects of the financial arrangements of managed care. The sample was stratified by practice size. A likelihood ratio test was performed to determine whether there were differences in practice characteristics and managed care financial arrangements that could explain variations in perceived ability to refer between physicians in solo/two-physician and group practices. RESULTS: Perceived ability to refer did not vary much between physicians in solo/two-physician practices and those in group practices. However, the determinants of perceived ability to refer did vary by practice size. The effects of physicians' characteristics were more pronounced among physicians in group practice, whereas the effects of financial arrangements were significant for physicians in solo/two-physician practices. The most significant determinant of perceived ability to refer was primary care physicians' satisfaction in their communication with specialists. CONCLUSION: Group practices are more immune than solo/two-physician practices to external financial arrangements from managed care contracts, possibly through their ability to take advantage of economies of scale and to diversify their sources of funds.     

The influence of payer mix on electronic health record adoption by physicians

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have examined the relationship between physician practice characteristics and electronic health record (EHR) adoption. Little is known about how payer mix influences physicians' decisions to implement EHR systems. PURPOSE: This study examines how different proportions of Medicare, Medicaid, and privately insured patients in physicians' practices influence EHR adoption. METHODOLOGY: Data from a large-scale survey of physician's use of information technologies in Florida were analyzed. Physicians were categorized based on their responses to questions regarding the proportion of patients in their practice that use Medicare, Medicaid, or private insurance products. The binary dependent variable of interest was EHR adoption among physicians. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were computed using logistic regression modeling techniques. The model examined the effect of changes in each payer type on EHR adoption, controlling for various practice characteristics. FINDINGS: Physicians with the highest percentage of Medicaid patients in their practices were significantly less likely to indicate using an EHR system when compared with those in the low-volume Medicaid group (OR = 0.690; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.50-0.95). No differences in EHR adoption were detected among physicians in the low, median, and high Medicare volume classifications. Among the private payer classifications, physicians whose practices were in the median group indicated significantly greater EHR use than those with relatively low levels of privately insured patients (OR = 1.62; 95% CI = 1.16-2.27). Those in the high-volume private payer group were also more likely than the low-volume group to have an EHR system, but this trend did not reach statistical significance (OR = 1.44; 95% CI = 0.96-2.16). PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Governmental insurance programs are either not influencing or negatively influencing EHR adoption among physicians in Florida. Given the quality and cost benefits associated with EHR use (particularly for health care payers), policymakers should consider strategies to incentivize or reward EHR adoption among doctors who care for Medicare and Medicaid patients.     

Rural-urban differences in primary care physicians' practice patterns, characteristics, and incomes

CONTEXT: Low salaries and difficult work conditions are perceived as a major barrier to the recruitment of primary care physicians to rural settings. PURPOSE: To examine rural-urban differences in physician work effort, physician characteristics, and practice characteristics, and to determine whether, after adjusting for any observed differences, rural primary care physicians' incomes were lower than those of urban primary care physicians. METHODS: Using survey data from actively practicing office-based general practitioners (1,157), family physicians (1,378), general internists (2,811), or pediatricians (1,752) who responded to the American Medical Association's annual survey of physicians between 1992 and 2002, we used linear regression modeling to determine the association between practicing in a rural (nonmetropolitan) or urban (standard metropolitan statistical area) setting and physicians' annual incomes after controlling for specialty, work effort, provider characteristics, and practice characteristics. FINDINGS: Rural primary care physicians' unadjusted annual incomes were similar to their urban counterparts, but they tended to work longer hours, complete more patient visits, and have a much greater proportion of Medicaid patients. After adjusting for work effort, physician characteristics, and practice characteristics, primary care physicians who practiced in rural settings made $9,585 (5%) less than their urban counterparts (95% confidence intervals: -$14,569, -$4,602, P < .001). In particular, rural practicing general internists and pediatricians experienced lower incomes than did their urban counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing rural physicians' lower incomes, longer work hours, and greater dependence on Medicaid reimbursement may improve the ability to ensure that an adequate supply of primary care physicians practice in rural settings.     

Rural–Urban Differences in Primary Care Physicians' Practice Patterns, Characteristics, and Incomes

ABSTRACT:  Context: Low salaries and difficult work conditions are perceived as a major barrier to the recruitment of primary care physicians to rural settings. Purpose: To examine rural–urban differences in physician work effort, physician characteristics, and practice characteristics, and to determine whether, after adjusting for any observed differences, rural primary care physicians' incomes were lower than those of urban primary care physicians. Methods: Using survey data from actively practicing office-based general practitioners (1,157), family physicians (1,378), general internists (2,811), or pediatricians (1,752) who responded to the American Medical Association's annual survey of physicians between 1992 and 2002, we used linear regression modeling to determine the association between practicing in a rural (nonmetropolitan) or urban (standard metropolitan statistical area) setting and physicians' annual incomes after controlling for specialty, work effort, provider characteristics, and practice characteristics. Findings: Rural primary care physicians' unadjusted annual incomes were similar to their urban counterparts, but they tended to work longer hours, complete more patient visits, and have a much greater proportion of Medicaid patients. After adjusting for work effort, physician characteristics, and practice characteristics, primary care physicians who practiced in rural settings made $9,585 (5%) less than their urban counterparts (95% confidence intervals: −$14,569, −$4,602, P < .001). In particular, rural practicing general internists and pediatricians experienced lower incomes than did their urban counterparts. Conclusions: Addressing rural physicians' lower incomes, longer work hours, and greater dependence on Medicaid reimbursement may improve the ability to ensure that an adequate supply of primary care physicians practice in rural settings.     

Losing ground: physician income, 1995-2003

Between 1995 and 2003, average physician net income from the practice of medicine declined about 7 percent after adjusting for inflation, according to a national study from the Center for Studying Health System Change (HSC). The decline in physicians' real income stands in sharp contrast to the wage trends for other professionals who saw about a 7 percent increase after adjusting for inflation during the same period. Among different types of physicians, primary care physicians fared the worst with a 10.2 percent decline in real income between 1995 and 2003, while surgeons' real income declined by 8.2 percent. But medical specialists' real income essentially remained unchanged. Physicians reported working slightly fewer hours overall but spent more time on direct patient care. Flat or declining fees from both public and private payers appear to be a major factor underlying declining real incomes for physicians. The downward trend in real incomes since the mid-1990s likely is an important reason for growing physician unwillingness to undertake pro bono work, including charity care and volunteering to serve on hospital committees.     

Financial incentives and the supply of laboratory tests

This study examined how the number of laboratory tests taken by a sample of Norwegian contract physicians is influenced by their private economy outside of the practice and by changes in remuneration. The data are drawn from 40,000 consultations carried out by 44 contract physicians in 1991-1994. Two factors which led to changes in the level of physicians' income are considered: changes in remuneration for consultations and laboratory tests and changes in interest rates on loans and bank deposits. The effect which changes in interest rates have on physicians' disposable income was calculated using information about their financial assets and debts obtained from tax assessments. The main finding was that changes in private economy and changes in remuneration have no or only a small effect on the number of laboratory tests taken. Our results suggest that fee regulation can be an effective means of controlling physicians' income and therefore government expenditure on primary physician services.     

Assessing Medicaid patients' perceptions of the OB/GYN-patient relationship

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to understand how the dynamics of the health care provider-patient relationship differ between Medicaid patients and private pay patients in the context of obstetric care. Various aspects of the patient-physician relationship were examined including trust, commitment, dependence, social content, service quality, and behavioral outcomes such as satisfaction, referral behavior, ease of voice, and retention. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to a sample of mothers who had recently given birth. MANOVA was used to compare the means of Medicaid patients with private pay patients for the variables of interest in the study. RESULTS: Medicaid patients had lower commitment to their primary physician. They trusted the practice, the primary physician, and the other physicians in the practice less. They perceived themselves as less similar to both the overall practice and their primary physician and also rated their health care service experience lower. They were less satisfied and less likely to use the same practice for future pregnancies or make referrals. They also felt less comfortable voicing complaints. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence clearly indicates that Medicaid obstetric patients perceived their service experience more negatively than private pay patients. Health care providers know they must provide clinical quality for their patients, however, in treating Medicaid patients they need to focus on patient driven-quality as well. The results indicate that health care providers, particularly OB/GYNs, need to do a better job of determining and delivering the key performance criteria that Medicaid patients use to make trust judgements.     

Primary care physician incentives in medical group practices

CONTEXT: Although medical groups are adapting to changes in financing health care, little is known about individual physician incentives in this environment. OBJECTIVES: To describe methods group practices use to compensate primary care physicians in a managed care environment and to examine the association of revenue sources for the group practice from all patients and primary care physician incentives. DESIGN: We surveyed by mail group practice administrators for practices that had at least 200 members continuously enrolled in 1995. SETTING: Group practices that had contractual arrangements with Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Minnesota. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred of 129 group practices returned usable surveys. RESULTS: Most groups had some portion of primary care physicians' compensation at risk, although 17 groups compensated them through fully guaranteed annual salary. Seventy-one groups used productivity, 4 groups used quality of care, 1 group used utilization, and 30 used group financial performance. Factors reported to significantly influence primary care physician compensation included billings or charges, overall group practice performance, and net revenue or profit. Groups that had a higher proportion of income from various types of fee-for-service arrangements used lower proportions of base salary for primary care physician compensation and were more likely to relate physician income to measures of productivity. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation exists in the types of primary care physician incentives implemented by medical groups. Base salary, individual productivity, and group financial performance were most frequently used to determine compensation. Physician personal financial risk was higher overall in group practices that derived more revenue from fee-for-service contracts.     

Medicare payment changes and physicians' incomes

An effort to control the physician portion of Medicare expenditures and to narrow the income gap between primary care and procedure-based physicians was effected through t he enactment of the Medicare Fee Schedule (MFS). To determine whether academic and private sector physicians' incomes had demonstrated changes consistent with payment changes, we collected income information from surveys of private sector physicians and academic physicians in six specialties: (1) family practice; (2) general internal medicine; (3) psychiatry; (4) general surgery; (5) radiology; and (6) anesthesiology. With the exception of general internal medicine, the anticipated changes in Medicare revenue were not closely associated with income changes in either the academic or private sector group. Academic physicians were underpaid, relative to their private sector counterparts, but modestly less so at the end of the period examined. Our findings suggest that using changes in payment schedules to change incomes in order to influence the attractiveness of different specialties, even with a very large payer, may be ineffective. Should academic incomes remain uncompetitive with private sector incomes, it may be increasingly difficult to persuade physicians to enter academic careers.     

Small Town Health Care Safety Nets: Report on a Pilot Study

CONTEXT: Very little is known about the health care safety net in small towns, especially in towns where there is no publicly subsidized safety-net health care. PURPOSE: This pilot study of the primary care safety net in 7 such communities was conducted to start building knowledge about the rural safety net. METHODS: Interviews were conducted and secondary data collected to assess the community need for safety-net care, the health care safety-net role of public officials, and the availability of safety-net care at private primary care practices and its financial impact on these practices. FINDINGS: An estimated 20% to 40% of the people in these communities were inadequately insured and needed access to affordable health care, and private primary care practices in most towns played an important role in making primary care available to them. Most of the physician practices were owned or subsidized by a hospital or regional network, though not explicitly to provide charity care. It is likely this ownership or support enabled the practices to sustain a higher level of charity care than would have been possible otherwise. In the majority of communities studied, the leading public officials played no role in ensuring access to safety-net care. CONCLUSIONS: State and national government policy makers should consider subsidy programs for private primary care practices that attempt to meet the needs of the inadequately insured in the many rural communities where no publicly subsidized primary safety-net care is available. Subsidies should be directed to physicians in primary care shortage areas who provide safety-net care; this will improve safety-net access and, at the same time, improve physician retention by bolstering physician incomes. Options include enhanced Medicare physician bonuses and grants or tax credits to support income-related sliding fee scales.     

Payment generosity and physician acceptance of Medicare and Medicaid patients

Using 2008 physician survey data, we estimate the relationship between the generosity of fees paid to primary care physicians under Medicaid and Medicare and his/her willingness to accept new patients covered by Medicaid, Medicare, or both programs (i.e., dually enrolled patients). Findings reveal physicians are highly responsive to fee generosity under both programs. Also, their willingness to accept patients under either program is affected by the generosity of fees under the other program, i.e., there are significant spillover effects between Medicare and Medicare fee generosity. We also simulate how physicians in 2008 would have likely responded to Medicaid and Medicare payment reforms similar to those embodied in the 2010 Affordable Care Act, had they been permanently in place in 2008. Our findings suggest that “Medicaid Parity” for primary care physicians would have likely dramatically improved physician willingness to accept new Medicaid patients while only slightly reducing their willingness to accept new Medicare patients. Also, many more primary care physicians would have been willing to treat dually enrolled patients.     

From socialist principles to motorcycle maintenance: the origin and development of the salaried physician model in the Israeli Public Health Services, 1918 to 1998.

For more than 70 years, physicians in the Israeli health care system have been employed on a fixed salary rather than on a fee-for-service basis. The present report is a brief review of the origin and development of this unique salaried physician model and its effect on the terms of physicians' employment. Archival documents were reviewed. The salaried physician model was introduced to ensure egalitarian health care for patients rather than equal payment for physicians. It was accepted by physicians because it guaranteed their employment and income. However, over the years, the salaried physician model has evolved into a complex wage scale, with multiple fringe benefits that bypass formal agreements in order to reward individual physicians. In addition, the salaried physician model has encouraged illegal private practice, which is viewed today as one of the major problems of the Israeli Public Health Services.     

In 2011 nearly one-third of physicians said they would not accept new medicaid patients, but rising fees may help

When fully implemented, the Affordable Care Act will expand the number of people with health insurance. This raises questions about the capacity of the health care workforce to meet increased demand. I used data on office-based physicians from the 2011 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey Electronic Medical Records Supplement to summarize the percentage of physicians currently accepting any new patients. Although 96?percent of physicians accepted new patients in 2011, rates varied by payment source: 31?percent of physicians were unwilling to accept any new Medicaid patients; 17?percent would not accept new Medicare patients; and 18?percent of physicians would not accept new privately insured patients. Physicians in smaller practices and those in metropolitan areas were less likely than others to accept new Medicaid patients. Higher state Medicaid-to-Medicare fee ratios were correlated with greater acceptance of new Medicaid patients. The findings serve as a useful baseline from which to measure the anticipated impact of Affordable Care Act provisions that could boost Medicaid payment rates to primary care physicians in some states while increasing the number of people with health care coverage.     

Factors affecting physician provision of preventive care to Medicaid children

Medicaid data for California, Georgia, Michigan, and Tennessee were used to analyze changes in fee and non-fee policies on physicians' service provision to children, before and after the enactment of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 (OBRA-1989). Only Michigan raised Medicaid preventive fees relative to the private sector. Higher relative fees increased child caseloads of participating physicians and the likelihood of providing preventive care. However, fee policy is less effective in urban poor areas due to residential segregation. Michigan's and Georgia's non-fee policy changes appeared effective in increasing EPSDT participation relative to the other States.     

Treat or refer: patients' interest in family physician involvement in their psychosocial problems

Seven hundred fifteen patients entering three family practice clinics (rural private practice, urban private practice, urban residency) completed a questionnaire assessing their interest in their family physicians' involvement in four representative psychosocial problems: spouse abuse or neglect, lack of exercise, a dying family member, and a sexual problem. A majority of the patients (57 to 78 percent) wanted help for the four problems from their family physicians either independently or in conjunction with a specialist, whereas only 4 to 21 percent wanted referral to specialists exclusively. Desired level of family physician involvement was predicted (R2 = .291) by a series of reason for involvement variables representing the following conceptual areas: perception of value in talking about personal problems; perception of family physician background, time, and interest; and the Health Belief Model. This study supports the conclusion that family physicians need skills in managing psychosocial problems so they can provide the type of care that most patients want.     

The impact of Medicaid on physician use by low-income children.

This study evaluated the determinants of physician use by low-income children, with an emphasis on the effect of Medicaid. Data are from the 1980 National Medical Care Utilization and Expenditure Survey. Regression analysis revealed that Medicaid children were more likely than both privately insured and uninsured children to visit an office-based physician. Also, Medicaid children with at least one visit to any setting had a higher number of visits than uninsured children. Such factors as age, health status, number of children in the family, educational status, and income also accounted for differences within the low-income population. The results suggest that access to physicians' services (including office-based physicians) can be increased by expanding Medicaid eligibility to uninsured low-income children and by improving private health insurance benefits among the underinsured.     

Connecting healthcare providers. An effective computer network can create durable relationships

Physician networks are computerized systems that link primary care physicians and specialists to one another and to hospitals and other providers. The networks have four key components: communication, practice management, practice marketing, and diagnostic testing capabilities. Advantages of physician networks for hospitals include increased physician loyalty and increased market share through additional admissions and outpatient registrations. From physicians' perspective, networks can help them expand their patient bases and increase revenue, provide additional services for existing patients, automate their offices, and improve their administrative efficiency. Networks also affect the way physicians practice medicine. Changes in practice patterns improve patient care, speed test results, and improve physicians' relationships with each other and their patients. They also save time for physicians and their staff. In deciding whether to develop a network, executives must examine the architectural framework and components they need, their commitment to physician relations, how reliant they are on primary care referrals, the competitive environment, the resources they are willing to commit, legal issues, and the physicians' role in planning.