Physicians

Who Should Pay Doctors?

flying cadeuciiHonest Pay for Honest Work.

Times have changed. And it’s time they change again.

In the past, medical care was more episodic than it is now. People went to see the doctor when they felt unwell. Diabetes affected mostly older patients, who didn’t live long enough with the disease to develop complications.

There were no blockbuster drugs for high cholesterol, Hepatitis C, fibromyalgia or chronic heartburn; we didn’t manage nearly as many patients on multiple medications as we do now.

In those times, a payment scale based on the length and complexity of the visit made sense, and there wasn’t much doctor-patient interaction between visits.

Today, we manage more chronic conditions, use more medications, do more laboratory monitoring, more patient education, and more administrative work on behalf of our patients than before.

Payment scales based only on what we do in the face-to-face visit have become hopelessly antiquated and stand in the way of the new demands of society – physicians providing longitudinal care for chronic conditions in patient-centered medical homes.


The business reality of primary care is that a doctor in a group practice needs to bring in $400/hour to keep the doors open and the support staff available to do the clinical and administrative work. Insurance billing and waiting to be paid is costly and requires cash on hand.

Electronic medical records are expensive to install and maintain.

Insurance payments for face-to-face visits are arbitrarily “discounted”, yet expectations are increasing for providers to render additional services after or between visits. In many cases the extra work is generated by the insurance company.

  • A new prescription requires a “prior authorization”, but many insurers are secretive about what drugs must be tried before the desired drug will be approved (only a handful of insurers post their preferred drug lists on Epocrates, the central repository physicians can access on their smartphones);
  • A “pharmacy benefit manager” contacts a doctor to suggest that his diabetic patient should be on an ACE inhibitor or a statin, when the patient is actually already taking them. He pays cash at Wal-Mart because that is less costly than the insurance copayment at the local drugstore, so these drugs don’t show up in the insurance company claims data;
  • An insurance company writes to alert a doctor that a patient on expensive medications may be noncompliant with his regimen because he has only used 60 days’ worth of medicine in the last 90 days. That’s because the kind doctor slipped the patient enough samples to save him a copayment once or twice;
  • A prior authorization unit demands a “peer-to-peer” telephone call before they will authorize an imaging study. All the information required may be in the medical record, but they still want a call. The practicing physician is kept on hold for ten minutes ($70 opportunity cost) only to read out loud from the record to the insurance doctor. Other times the rural doctor has to tell a big city cardiologist that he ordered a nuclear stress test on a female patient instead of a stress echo because the nearest facility that does stress echoes is 200 miles south on icy and snow-covered roads in the middle of January.

The economics of the medical practice require a certain productivity level just for survival, so the administrative duties are often given inadequate time, or no time at all, resulting in shorter patient visits just to capture a few moments to do the administrative work.

There is still considerable unreimbursed provider overtime, leading to physician stress, disillusionment and burnout.

We should be paid for this work, as well as for reviewing results and maintaining our patients’ medical records over time and in between visits – all noble ambitions of the medical home.

We should also, of course, be paid for face-to-face visits with our patients.

But who should pay?

The problem with having private insurance companies, Medicare or Medicaid pay is that patients have little reason to consider value for money spent. It’s natural to be less concerned about how we spend someone else’s money, particularly if that money used to be ours, before the tax man or insurance company took it away from us!

I know I am only a country doctor, but I have seen many different systems of health care since I started medical school in 1974, so in my next installment I will outline A Country Doctor’s Proposal for Health Insurance Reform.

Hans Duvefelt, MD is a Swedish-born family physician in a small town in rural Maine. He blogs regularly at A Country Doctor Writes where this piece originally appeared.

Livongo’s Post Ad Banner 728*90

29
Leave a Reply

12 Comment threads
17 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
11 Comment authors
Mike CopperKeithPeterMadelaineBarry Carol Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Mike Copper
Guest

Up to some extent I agree with you. Physicians should be paid for their overtime and hard work but the point is that everybody can not pay that much money. Something should be done for the poor patients too .

Keith
Guest
Keith

I would suggest that all the Family Practice physicians look north to Ontario Canada. I started billing fee for service in 2002 and to keep up with expenses most appointment times were 10 min or less. Thankfully on 2007 I switched to a capitation model of care that still has a small fee for service percentage built into to it for shadow billings. My income more than doubled, my daily patient load reduced to half because now I could discuss things with patients by phone or it could be taken care of by my nurse. EMR was included in the… Read more »

Barry Carol
Guest
Barry Carol

Providers, especially hospitals, set ludicrously high and completely arbitrary prices for their services that bear no relation to the cost of providing them. There are two reasons for this. First, they view it as a starting point for negotiations with insurers though most of the larger insurers now negotiate payment based on a percentage of or above Medicare rather than a discount from the chargemaster (list price). The second reason is that by law, providers must bill everyone the same including Medicare, Medicaid and private insurers. It’s the unfortunate uninsured patient that get hits with the absurd bills with some… Read more »

Peter
Guest
Peter

@Peter1,

What is wrong with amount paid by ins. and amount you owe on the EOB being paid to the doctor? Did they not do something for you?

John Ballard
Guest

I’m not arguing for or against any particular physician or bill. And thanks to insurance anything done for me is more than reasonably priced (unless you want to discuss dental work — which I and many regard as optional). My point is what Barry Carol points out below, that the amounts that appear on bills have more to do with negotiating what the market will bear than either costs or rates of compensation. That’s all.

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

Peter, they did “do something”, but the patient does not get the option of knowing what the final bill is before committing to the “something”. There is no shopping option to keep providers honest and profits within reason.

As well when we all seem to complain about health care costs it’s the prices that affect those costs.

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

“Beginning with the patient’s bill, the number which appears there as a specialist’s fee is certainly not what the hospital or the insurance company remits to that specialist.”

Maybe not but the, “amount paid by insurance and amount you owe” on the EOB does remit to the specialist.

John Ballard
Guest

Thanks. That’s clear enough. So the question then remains, how much of that amount is professional compensation and what portion must be used for other, presumably business and professional, expenses? It’s not an academic exercise. I’m in favor of high professional compensation levels, commensurate with comparable specialty rates, experience, competence, etc. But my guess is that the amounts being discussed are not “pay” in the way most people understand the word. Are there specialists among those termed “hospitalists”? And if so, are they compensated by the hour or by some other metric? Is there an “on call” rate for days,… Read more »

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

John B, what part of anyones compensation is for living expenses and what part disposable?

John Ballard
Guest

There’s a point behind this question but I can’t figure out what it is. I’m not trying to tell anybody how to spend their income, but there is a difference between compensation and income. The distinction between living expenses and disposable income is artificial. One man’s essential expense is another man’s luxury — from utility bills and basic transportation to membership dues in a private club and generous charitable donations. I don’t have a problem with annual cruises, nannies for the kids or second homes for vacations. The earned benefits of success don’t bother me. But “compensation” doesn’t always have… Read more »

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

“There’s a point behind this question but I can’t figure out what it is.” “So the question then remains, how much of that amount is professional compensation and what portion must be used for other, presumably business and professional, expenses?” John, you’re right “it’s not an academic exercise”. In the real world, outside of health care compensation, competitors keep most honest and humble by the comparison of “the price”, which includes all the “expenses” and “fat” and “greed” and “disposable” for life style. The Canadian comment is based on a negotiated rate with the government – the single payer. Extra… Read more »

John Ballard
Guest

So does that mean his reference to “capitation” is perhaps a rate negotiated with the provincial government? If so it sounds like how Medicare deals with MA (though the details of that formula are shrouded in complexity resembling near secrecy — another dimension of US healthcare costs having more to do with politics than actual economics).

You’re right about gaming systems. They’ve been around a long time. The world’s oldest profession isn’t called that for nothing.

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

“So does that mean his reference to “capitation” is perhaps a rate negotiated with the provincial government?”

It would have to be, but I doubt it was a single doc negotiation. Not sure if it applies to all areas of the province. Keith would have to provide details.

John Ballard
Guest

Thanks. It was mostly idle curiosity on my part. I’m reminded of the concierge practice trend here. It’s not for everybody, of course, but the stories of Dr. Lambert and Dr. Kernisan seem to fall along that line.

Here’s a fun link to a doctor blog I have been following a couple of years. After walking in the fire a long time and basically dropping out, Dr. Lumi St. Claire seems finally to have found what it takes to make her happy and fulfilled.
http://mywhitecoatisonfire.com/2014/04/12/its-all-about-the-v-word/

John Ballard
Guest

Something tells me the issue of “pay” might be clouded by confusing accounting issues. I’m neither an accountant nor a medical pro, but I suspect the word pay may have different meanings to different parties. Beginning with the patient’s bill, the number which appears there as a specialist’s fee is certainly not what the hospital or the insurance company remits to that specialist. I suspect that both of those agents retain part of that (can we call it “retail”) price. And depending on whether the specialist is or is not part of the hospital paid staff, the final numbers may… Read more »

Madelaine
Guest
Madelaine

I thoroughly enjoyed the blog post and am looking forward to the next. As far as the other comments go….I don’t think we should be dividing physicians on the basis of primary vs. specialists. The “cognitive” specialists, such as rheumatologists spend just as much, if not more, time with a multitude of patients on a daily basis. I don’t even think we should divide docs according to procedure vs. non- procedure. (Even though I DON’T do procedures) As a profession we need to unite for patient access and care, including maintaining the doctor- patient relationship….Nit picking among ourselves will not… Read more »

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

“As far as the other comments go….I don’t think we should be dividing physicians on the basis of primary vs. specialists.”

Madelaine, maybe you should consult the RUC to see why they “divide” specialists and primary care.

Hans Duvefelt
Guest
Hans Duvefelt

Thanks for all the comments. We need to change things. I am right now proofreading my next installment in the series about how doctors should get paid. Stay tuned.

Perry
Guest
Perry

What a novel idea, the patient herself actually pays the doctor. The doctor has way less hassles and can spend the time needed with the patient.
The patient can get quality time with the doc, and maybe develop an actual relationship. The pesky insurance companies and other intrusive third parties are left in the cold. The doctor can now actually work FOR the patient.

Barry Carol
Guest
Barry Carol

What about the people who can’t pay because they’re poor, unemployed or have already incurred hefty bills not fully covered by insurance? Are you suggesting we go back to the sliding scale of the old days where the wealthy banker is charged $250 for a simple visit while the unemployed working person pays $10 or nothing at all? Kaiser is very successful in CA paying their doctors on a salaried basis and NOT using relative value units billed to determine bonus compensation. They also seem to be able to handle millions of e-mailed questions from patients and can fill prescriptions… Read more »

Ryan McCostlin
Guest

The fee-for-service model is broken. More and more doctors are thinking seriously about a new model called Direct Primary Care. A physician practice called Qliance has already made it work, and more and more Direct Primary Care practices are opening every month across the country.

Read more about this here:

http://www.bernardhealth.com/woofstreetjournal/bid/182889/Top-Three-Obstacles-to-Better-Primary-Care

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

“There is still considerable unreimbursed provider overtime, leading to physician stress, disillusionment and burnout.”

All physicians? In all practice environments? Or just maybe the single family GP in a country setting?

Hans Duvefelt
Guest
Hans Duvefelt

Unfortunately, this is not just a solo practitioner problem. It is a problem in primary care practices in general.

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

Hans, do you favor a better balance between what specialists get paid and how GPs are valued? That would mean reducing specialist pay to reward primary better as this system already is costing us a king’s ransom.

Hans Duvefelt
Guest
Hans Duvefelt

I do think primary care is undervalued. But there is more than physician pay to consider here. Yes, some specialties’ pay may need to be modified some, but look at what we spend on billing and defensive medicine. Also, look at drug prices and our use of imaging. Does every patient need an MRI before seeing an orthopedist?

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

Hans, what you advocate above is achievable with single-pay, not this system. BCBS’s commercials say the U.S. spends 50% more than other industrialized countries on paperwork and administration. Canada (among others) regulates drug prices and physician reimbursement and limits access to expensive or unnecessary care based on need.

Gwinette Cowan
Guest
Gwinette Cowan

It is not just private or solo gp’s. It is big group practice gp’s, specialists and surgeons even in the big city. Not only GP’s but specialists and surgeons as well! They are so stressed by being paid based on productivity especially during a time when fee for service is dissolving. There is much more demand for telephone interaction, forms, insurer demands, documentation, coding staff required, quality control logging and maintenance. Over 38% of bills submitted to pay or are not paid first time around, they either decide to request further documentation or they don’t pay on certain codes or… Read more »

John Ballard
Guest

We need to find a way to place value that creates financial support for all of these non face to face interactions. With the significant shift on how health care is getting paid, we need to work even smarter and faster than just last year. We have some major problems to fix and it is costing medical organizations a lot of money for something that holds no “financial” reimbursement. I almost stopped with a snarky “How’s that lack of a public option working out for ya?” but I’m resisting. As long as health care is bought and sold as a… Read more »

John Ballard
Guest

The old joke is that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. The design of the American health care delivery system looks like whatever keeps all those vintage cars running in Cuba. It’s remarkable to function at all.

This excellent description has less to do with health care than protecting the revenue streams of insurance and drug companies, and in the case of Medicare and Medicaid compliance with a welter of rules and regulations. It begs the question cui bono?