Physician payment reform is the key to fixing the health care system

Changing the way doctors are paid is more important than the debate over the public insurance option, or the arguments over whether we should adopt a single-payer system or not.

Atul Gawande’s recent New Yorker article is a tour de force, and gets down to the core of why American health care is so expensive. I won’t bother summarizing it here – it deserves to be read in its entirety – but I’ll highlight one of the bottom lines.

Dr. Gawande travels to McAllen, Texas, where the most expensive care in the country is being practiced. Doctors there act like businesspeople, which, as the payment system is currently constructed, is the natural thing to do. After all, if you pay physicians to do more, that’s exactly what they’ll do.

In fact, there are tremendous economic barriers to forming the types of integrated low-cost, high-quaility health systems that policy experts love, such as Kaiser Permanente or the Mayo Clinic.

With that in mind, the health care debate that’s currently dominating the media airwaves entirely misses the point:

Activists and policymakers spend an inordinate amount of time arguing about whether the solution to high medical costs is to have government or private insurance companies write the checks. Here’s how this whole debate goes. Advocates of a public option say government financing would save the most money by having leaner administrative costs and forcing doctors and hospitals to take lower payments than they get from private insurance. Opponents say doctors would skimp, quit, or game the system, and make us wait in line for our care; they maintain that private insurers are better at policing doctors. No, the skeptics say: all insurance companies do is reject applicants who need health care and stall on paying their bills. Then we have the economists who say that the people who should pay the doctors are the ones who use them. Have consumers pay with their own dollars, make sure that they have some “skin in the game,” and then they’ll get the care they deserve. These arguments miss the main issue. When it comes to making care better and cheaper, changing who pays the doctor will make no more difference than changing who pays the electrician. The lesson of the high-quality, low-cost communities is that someone has to be accountable for the totality of care. Otherwise, you get a system that has no brakes. You get McAllen.

Changing how doctors are paid is the key to health care reform. We’re now arguing about who does it, and that won’t address the central problem of cost.

This is the best article on the cost of health care that I’ve read.  As I mentioned on Twitter the other day, if you choose to read one health policy article in your lifetime, this one is it.

email

  • Christopher Lee

    So do you have a suggestion on how doctors should be paid then?

    • http://www.kevinmd.com Kevin

      One option that makes sense, yet receives little consideration, is simply paying doctors by the hour. Value time spent with patients, rather than seeing and doing more.

  • Ray

    So how come the administration and congress is side stepping this impt issue in pusuit of public option battle. Is it any surprise that doctors are human and will obviusly do more and not less testing. This results in more unecessary care that patients don’t really need. The waste care is harzardous care because it harms patients. Sad thing is patients think more care is better care, getting CT scan and fany labs for simple constipation is a disaster but happens. We need incentives to spend more time with patient and this will cut down tons of wastage. Doctors are human and will follow the money and the extra time spent with patient will build trust, lower malpractice, avoid exposure to unecessary tests, give satisfaction to provider, make them think of patient’s exposure etc etc

  • http://mdredux.blogspot.com james gaulte

    Who pays the doctor does matter.When third party payments are the norm and the major payer (Medicare) has since 1991 put price controls in place it matters a great deal..With price controls, shortages and diminution in quality follows. If the electrician was “reimbursed” according to a system of national electrical repair services which were price capped, you would struggle more to get anything fixed and quality would suffer.

  • Doc Stone

    Numerous advantages to paying docs by the hour:

    It makes comparisons to other professions, almost all of which require less education easy and, in the case of cognitive services at least makes it easy to justify higher payment rates. My state’s starting pay rate for contract lawyers is almost double what it is for pediatricians.

    It makes catching the big cheaters easy and uninstrusive. While some may claim they were actually performing high level evals on 50 patients a d day, they can’t claim that they worked 28 hours.

    It incentivizes neither denying or expanding services to the degree that capitation does or fee for service.

    It actually incentivizes more thorough evaluations and counseling which is likely to lead to fewer expensive diagnostic and therapeutic dead-ends. More patient education means lower costs usually.

    It may lead to happier doctors who aren’t trapped in the productivity treadmill (ffs) or capitation squeeze who can focus on the doctor-patient relationship, make patients happier, and continue to recruit the best to medicine.

    Procedures would naturally justify a higher hourly rate as they are more stressful. There would not however be financial incentive to rush the job and do al lot of the sloppy mill work that has become the norm in many cases.

    The losers would be docs who are doing too much work in too little time now to be doing a thoughtful and thorough job. The other loser would be the uninsured who the docs would be really truly treating on their own time rather than “cost shifting”. But since the democrats are going to mandate everyone buy insurance, that wouldn’t be a problem.

    Just think. No more CPT manual!

  • David Block MD, PhD

    Might we just remember, once again, that Gawande is enlisting allies in “the battle for the soul of American medicine”, as he says? Might we just please remember that when we fight for the soul, we typically have to kill the body – just so that the soul knows it can’t go flying off to false gods? As proof, may I offer the Reformation, if not, indeed, the history of organized religion on this planet?

    So, here’s my solution: ask doctors what they want. Don’t ask the ACP or the AAFP or the AMA or any other acronym. Go into every hospital (you may as well, since hospitals and their medical staffs are seen as one entity) and bring in every doctor. Attendance is mandatory: you ain’t there, you ain’t on staff, you ain’t in this community. (Procrustean, isn’t it? Too bad. It’s our lives. Nobody gets to say he was never asked.) Talk to every bloody one of us. All 4 or 500,000 practicing doc’s. Will it take time? Yup. Money? Yup. But what the Feds and other insurers have with the medical community is NOT a labor union (doc’s tried that, and got slapped down: we are something called “Management”) organized according to a 19th century Germanic ideal of management hierarchy. So don’t look for an Al Shanker or Jimmy Hoffa. Go into Nashua, NH, or Milledgeville, GA, and talk to the man or woman who says NOTHING at staff meetings. Give everybody a chance to talk. What you have is a heterogeneous body of everything from prima donnna’s to mystics, and every one of them has something to say. If you want to win agreement, if you want to “Get to Yes” (as the book says), then talk to these highly intelligent, cynical, pissed off men and women. This is NOT a political vote where you can go back and re-do it in 4 years. This is trying to gain understanding and allegiance. See what they want. America might be surprised.

    This means that some number of people who work with us to figure out our needs and desires will have to learn how to educate physicians out there in Cullman, AL, or wherever else. Not “train”, but “educate.” Not your usual overpaid, overfed, Big-Pharma-ed, “Got a New Procedure You Need to Order”, under-slept, highly immune-PhD-competent, too-published dweeb. Nope. Somebody who knows how to listen, how to understand, how to assimilate information and reach a confluence of doctor consciousness.

    And no reason to assume that you are going to need a universal, national, totally homo-sapiened solution. The anatomy and physiology of folks in Minneapolis is the same as in Augusta Maine and Georgia. But the folks ain’t the same. Their epidemiology is different. Their cultures are different. Their compliance is different. Our elected officials have simply said, “Too bad, Doctor. It’s one size fits all. Why don’t you just take that extra hour or two per patient to tell them why you can’t/won’t/wouldn’t do for them what they’ve had for the past 6 generations?” Individualize the solutions by illness-community. Mercedes couldn’t solve Chrysler’s problems because Detroit ain’t Munich. Why assume that Park Avenue and 61st St is…dare I say it?… McAllen, Texas? Medicine is about people, not about receptor sites.

    How’s about this solution? Pay every practicing physician (and the retired neurologists, such as myself) $500,000 per year. Pay them enough to make them say, “Holy Smoke!” If there are 500,000 docs, you’ll spend about $250 billion/year. Well, Medicare paid about $280 billion several years ago just for Part B. Doesn’t even count Medicaid, the Blues, etc. (who would just reimburse the Feds). Pay them darn doc’s enough so that it strains credulity. Every doctor, regardless of specialty, regardless of practice. Every FP, every shrink, every Orthopod, every whatever. Standardize procedures by medical necessity – it’s coming anyway, if not already here. No incentive to order tests for money – although you might do it if you thought you had some nifty new way to diagnose SBE, for example, and everybody agreed. No medical malpractice: there is one community standard. Take their office burden from them. Not the people, just the hiring/firing/buying paper clips. You need those secretaries and such so that when you’re worried as hell about your last patient, that receptionist can tell you a joke good enough for you to wet your pants/skirt.

    Don’t reward them doc’s by the hour or by the patient. (This last is the remnant of 30′s and 40′s cottage industry socialism, anyway.) Reward them by their Life and by their Career. This is not Canada: once you do your 100 subdural evacuations and you’re off to Florida. Try it and you can stay in Fort Lauderdale. Only, we won’t take you down there. You’re not a Doctor; you’re a self-serving, cynical wad.

    And here’s what the body politic demands or gets in return: complete and total devotion. (Which is what they demand anyway; it’s just that now, there’s cynicism on all sides of the negotiating table). You want to be a doctor? Fine. You are a doctor 24/7/365. You do public health and public education. You work out with other physicians the best way possible to cover and improve the health of your community along with the local university, clergy, mayor, etc. (Your community health is now finite, familiar, and knowable, or had better be known if you like being “Doctor”). Every doctor is his/her brother’s/sister/s keeper, and those family members are not defined by education, church affiliation, “your statement of conscience”, whatever. If you’re a doctor, then you’re a doctor; if you ain’t, you ain’t. You see a doc who sucks according to a jury of his actual peers? He’s gone – delicensed, defrocked. No Betty Ford, no “I’ll try better” or “I’m disabled under ADA.” He’s gone. The community belongs to you, and you belong to the community. You don’t want to participate? Your problem. Patients want things that have no clear medical indication – whatever that might be – then it is NOT the job of the community physician to dissuade that unhappy soul, but rather your local congressman who negotiates with the higher powers.

    Is this a single-payer system? Yup. Is there risk for us, and for the community? Yup. Is there risk for us now? Double Yup. Ask the doctor what he wants. If he doesn’t want this, but wants to be a businessman who practices medicine – fine. Just, not here.

    Deep down, we (whoever “we” are) think Medicine is a calling. Let it be so. Put economic and political decisions back into the hands of economists and politicians. Doctors are not here to make Scott Serota’s life easier. Just the patient’s.

    So, lots of money so no incentive to abuse the system, but no worries about mortgage, malpractice, loans, etc. Free hand to practice medicine. Total physician responsibility. Doc’s solve community problems with other doc’s, along with community members. You screw up – one strike and you’re out. Doctors practice medicine. MBAs practice health care.

    That’s about as far as I’ve gotten.

  • Michael Kirsch, M.D.

    Paid by the hour? I guess its appeal depends upon the actual hourly wage. Who would determine them? Would a heart surgeon’s wage be the same as an allergist’s? How would procedurists be reimbursed? Does this system foster mediocrity as it does not reward medical quality (however you define this)? I certainly agree that the current payment system is not optimal. I would prefer, however, to devise a system that encourages and rewards medical excellence. I don’t think you can measure this punching a time clock. For more thoughts on the challenge of measuring medical quality, see http://www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com

  • Kalama

    Maybe it would make more sense if MDs actually listened to their patients and spent more time with them than an obligatory and cursory review of the chart, writing a script and out the door in less than 10 minutes. Those MDs who actually DO practice a true integrative medicine take up to 3 hours on an initial visit to address the whole person and their concerns.

  • HudsonMD

    I thought the article was insightful. But the information on physician owned hospitals is totally false. To say that doctors will admit patients to their hospital and run test after test and procedure after procedure goes against the for-profit model of the hospital. Knowing anything about how hospitals are reimbursed makes that statement totally erroneous. The exact opposite would be true. Admit the patients and run very little tests and get them out as soon as possible with very high DRG. It is very hard for me to get past this error in his article. Just seems like he does not know alot about private practice. Seems like he is just trying to stir things up without actually offering any solutions to the problem.

  • k

    @james gaulte – Go find a copy of the NECA Labor Units Manual.

    If reimbursement is based on piecework, more=better for the physician-businessman, not necessarily for the pt. Pricing models like those used at Mayo or Geisinger appear to satisfy patients and physicians on multiple levels.

    Perhaps more types of medical care should be bundled (in a manner similar to global surgical pkgs) with all parties splitting a single, known pot of dollars for whatever procedure/service is provided.

    One of the things that bugs me most about the current system (other than pre-existing conditions, ludicrous premiums, et al) is the multitude of negotiated rates. For example, nobody should get EOBs billing exorbitant rates for a simple lab test (venipuncture additional), less insurance company’s negotiated rate, and both insurer and pt end up paying $10 each.

  • David Block MD, PhD

    If More=Better, then don’t incentivize more. Don’t reward the behavior you don’t want. Don’t pay by the hour because we don’t really know at what rate an hour of physician time should be compensated. While the RVU rate suggests that the Feds would like to compensate cognitive MD work at about $125/hr, that is purely arbitrary. Nor would anybody practice allopathic, osteopathic, or chiropractice medicine at that rate – even thought you often end up doing just that.

    Pay doctors on a high enough yearly salary to incentivize being a doctor, not an entrepreneur. Make the salary high enough to attract the best and brightest. Make it high enough so that physicians will want to remain physicians. Make it difficult to get there, easy to lose – so that we value it. Give doctors back to their communities, and communities back to their doctors, regardless of specialty. CV surgeons make more money because society values the fear of immediate death and thus the procedures that ameliorate that fear. Well, don’t EVER pay for a procedure, whether surgical, diagnostic, E&M. Pay people for being doctors.

    Ask the people who are doctors what THEY want. Don’t ask the people of an apparatchik class who just think they know what’s best based on the latest economic calculation of risk and return.

  • Dr. Mary Johnson

    Dr. Block, I think I love you;)

    Hope you don’t mind being quoted:

    http://drjshousecalls.blogspot.com/2009/06/blogging-with-north-carolina-medical_03.html

  • Doc Stone

    Block’s call for all docs to be salaried reminds me of Frank Slaughter’s novel “That None Should Die”. It was a 1941 work that called for health reform but depicted a fictitious botch of it first in which some of the salaried docs just raked in the money without working for it while others tried to pick up the slack. Human nature is such that many would. Hell, I know that I might be one of them. His model is one in which society turns physicians into just slaves with fat allowances. It would be natural and hardly even condemable if the slaves then stole what they could and did as little as possible–that is what slaves have always done. Of then the control and supervision backed by ever harsher punishments would have to ramp up to keep them in line. As for the notion that the salary would be fat enough to override all natural self-interest or desire for freedom? Well, I don’t think I would trust my life to such a superficial materialist. How long before he figures out that the less effort, the more he is getting paid for his effort.

    Did Block ever actually talk to any of those human beings who were his patients? Seems a bit naive.

Trending