Friday, March 20, 2015

Tweet

[IWS] RAND: EFFECTS OF HEALTH CARE PAYMENT MODELS ON PHYSICIAN PRACTICE IN THE UNITED STATES [19 March 2015]

IWS Documented News Service

_______________________________

Institute for Workplace Studies-----------------Professor Samuel B. Bacharach

School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies

Cornell University

16 East 34th Street, 4th floor--------------------Stuart Basefsky

New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau

________________________________________________________________________

NOTE: Funding for this service ends on 31 March 2015. Postings will end on this date as well.

 

RAND

 

EFFECTS OF HEALTH CARE PAYMENT MODELS ON PHYSICIAN PRACTICE IN THE UNITED STATES [19 March 2015]

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR869.html

or

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR800/RR869/RAND_RR869.pdf

[full-text, 142 pages]

 

Appendix B: Interview Guides

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR800/RR869/RAND_RR869.appendixB.pdf

 

[full-text, 19 pages]

Abstract
The project reported here, sponsored by the American Medical Association (AMA), aimed to describe the effects that alternative health care payment models (i.e., models other than fee-for-service payment) have on physicians and physician practices in the United States. These payment models included capitation, episode-based and bundled payment, shared savings, pay for performance, and retainer-based practice. Accountable care organizations and medical homes, which are two recently expanding practice and organizational models that frequently participate in one or more of these alternative payment models, were also included. Project findings are intended to help guide efforts by the AMA and other stakeholders to make improvements to current and future alternative payment programs and help physician practices succeed in these new payment models — i.e., to help practices simultaneously improve patient care, preserve or enhance physician professional satisfaction, satisfy multiple external stakeholders, and maintain economic viability as businesses. The report provides both findings and recommendations.

Key Findings

Payment Models Affect Practices

·         Multiple practice leaders and market interviewees reported that their own practices or others in their markets were changing their organizational models in response to new payment models.

·         Respondents perceived that alternative payment models have encouraged the development of team approaches to care management.

·         Market observers and physician practices reported that global capitation and related shared savings models were changing relationships between primary care and subspecialist physicians.

·         Physician practices reported making significant investments in their data management capabilities to track and improve performance in alternative payment models.

·         The multiplicity of pay-for-performance and other incentive programs has created a heavy administrative burden for some physician practices.

Payment Models Affect Physicians

·         The financial incentives applied to physician practices via alternative payment models were not simply "passed through" to individual physicians. Practice leaders described transforming certain practice-level financial incentives into internal nonfinancial incentives for individual physicians. Leaders acknowledged the presence of inconsistencies between financial and nonfinancial incentives. Alternative payment models had negligible effects on the aggregate income of individual physicians within the sample. Some physicians reported wanting to have their incomes more closely linked to quality and efficiency of care.

·         Alternative payment models have not substantially changed how physicians delivered face-to-face patient care. Additional nonclinical work created significant discontent. Most physicians in practice leadership positions were optimistic and enthusiastic about alternative payment models, while most physicians not in leadership roles expressed at least some level of apprehension.

Recommendations

  • To optimize the quantity and content of physician work under alternative payment models, ensure that physician practices have support and guidance.
  • To improve the effectiveness of alternative payment models, address physicians' concerns about the operational details of these payment models.
  • To help them succeed in alternative payment models, ensure that physician practices have data and resources for data management and analysis.
  • To help physician practices respond constructively, harmonize key components of alternative payment models, especially performance measures.

 

________________________________________________________________________

This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?