Non-assigned Medicare payment increases practice revenue & lowers Medicare costs.

Private practice physicians can increase practice revenue and also save Medicare money. What seems like a paradox is instead a choice. The non-assigned Medicare payment option allows physicians to bill 8% more for their services. This also decreases Medicare payment 5%. Selecting the non-assigned payment method does not require permission from Medicare or any Medicare contractor. This is a physician decision and for 2014 must be made between mid-November and year end 2013.

What determines the income gap between French male and female GPs - the role of medical practices.

BACKGROUND: In many OECD countries, the gender differences in physicians' pay favour male doctors. Due to the feminisation of the doctor profession, it is essential to measure this income gap in the French context of Fee-for-service payment (FFS) and then to precisely identify its determinants. The objective of this study is to measure and analyse the 2008 income gap between males and females general practitioners (GPs). This paper focuses on the role of gender medical practices differentials among GPs working in private practice in the southwest region of France. METHODS: Using data from 339 private-practice GPs, we measured an average gender income gap of approximately 26% in favour of men. Using the decomposition method, we examined the factors that could explain gender disparities in income. RESULTS: The analysis showed that 73% of the income gap can be explained by the average differences in doctors' characteristics; for example, 61% of the gender income gap is explained by the gender differences in workload, i.e., number of consultations and visits, which is on average significantly lower for female GPs than for male GPs. Furthermore, the decomposition method allowed us to highlight the differences in the marginal returns of doctors' characteristics and variables contributing to income, such as GP workload; we found that female GPs have a higher marginal return in terms of earnings when performing an additional medical service. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study help to understand the determinants of the income gap between male and female GPs. Even though workload is clearly an essential determinant of income, FFS does not reduce the gender income gap, and there is an imperfect relationship between the provision of medical services and income. In the context of feminisation, it appears that female GPs receive a lower income but attain higher marginal returns when performing an additional consultation.

Survival of solo practitioners and small group practices in today's challenging marketplace: setting the ground work now--Part II.

In Part I of this article, in the January/February 2011 issue, we discussed how the delivery of healthcare of the future will be dramatically different from the past for physicians in private practice. As the debate continues to swirl around the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, physicians in private practice continue to face the biggest challenges of their careers: how to maintain profitability and survive in this recession that appears to have no end in sight. This article provides guidelines to empower physicians and their staff with proven practice management tools and techniques that have stood the test of time.

Price trends in single- and multispecialty physician practices.

Effective provision of physician services and the financial performance of physician practices depend on both cost and price. While there has been much discussion and research on the differences among physician organizations, particularly pertaining to cost and efficiency, little attention has been paid to how prices received for services have changed over time. In order to address this void in the literature, we focus on the trends in prices paid for services rendered by two different organizational structures, namely single- and multispecialty physician groups. In particular, we examine the Producer Price Index for each physician group over the period of 1994 to 2010.

Carving Out Financial Success: The Power of Insurance Carve-Outs in a Private Plastic Surgery Practice.

BACKGROUND: Since the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law, there has been a push away from fee-for-service payment models. The rise of bundled payments has drastically impacted plastic surgeons' incomes, especially nonsalaried surgeons in private practice. As a result, physicians must now attempt to optimize contractual reimbursement agreements (carve-outs) with insurance providers. The aim of this article is to explain the economics behind negotiating carve-outs and to offer a how-to guide for plastic surgeons to use in such negotiations. METHODS: Based on work relative value units, Medicare reimbursement, overhead expenses, physician workload, and desired income, the authors present an approach that allows surgeons to evaluate the reimbursement they receive for various procedures. The authors then review factors that influence whether a carve-out can be pursued. Finally, the authors consider relevant nuances of negotiating with insurance companies. RESULTS: Using tissue expander insertion (CPT 19357) as an example, the authors review the mathematics, thought process required, and necessary steps in determining whether a carve-out should be pursued. Strategies for negotiation with insurance companies were identified. The presented approach can be used to potentially negotiate a carve-out for any reconstructive procedure that meets appropriate financial criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding practice costs will allow plastic surgeons to evaluate the true value of insurance reimbursements and determine whether a carve-out is worth pursuing. Plastic surgeons must be prepared to negotiate adequate reimbursement carve-outs whenever possible. Ultimately, by aligning the best quality patient care with insurance companies' financial motivations, plastic surgeons have the opportunity to improve reimbursement for some reconstructive procedures.

Analysis of consultants' NHS and private incomes in England in 2003/4.

OBJECTIVE: Consultants employed by the NHS in England are allowed to undertake private practice to supplement their NHS income. Until the introduction of a new contract from October 2003, those employed on full-time contracts were allowed to earn private incomes no greater than 10% of their NHS income. In this paper we investigate the magnitude and determinants of consultants' NHS and private incomes. DESIGN: Quantitative analysis of financial data. SETTING: A unique, anonymized, non-disclosive dataset derived from tax returns for a sample of 24,407 consultants (92.3% of the total) in England for the financial year 2003/4. MAIN OUTCOME METHODS: The conditional mean total, NHS and private incomes earned by age group, type of contract, specialty and region of place of work. RESULTS: The mean annual total, NHS and private incomes across all consultants in 2003/4 were pound 110,773, pound 76,628 and pound 34,144, respectively. Incomes varied by age, type of contract, specialty and region of place of work. The ratio of mean private to NHS income for consultants employed on a full-time contract was 0.26. The mean private income across specialties ranged from pound 5,144 (for paediatric neurology) to pound 142,723 (plastic surgery). There was a positive association between mean private income and NHS waiting lists across specialties. CONCLUSIONS: Consultants employed on full-time contracts on average exceeded the limits on private income stipulated by the 10% rule. Specialty is a more important determinant of income than the region in which the consultant works. Further work is required to explore the association between mean private income and waiting lists.

Achieving health outcomes through professional dental care: comparing the cost of dental treatment for children in three practice modes.

The search for effective strategies to deal with prevention and treatment of oral disease focuses on children as a natural target population. This article reports data on the comparative costs of delivering dental care to children via (1) a school-based practice using Expanded Function Dental Auxiliaries, (2) a school-based practice without EFDAs, and (3) a group of unrelated private dental practices operating independent of the school system. Utilization of a dentist's services varied significantly between the children assigned to private care and those assigned to the school-based programs, but it cost less per patient to provide dental treatment through the private practitioners. If school-based practices are clearly more effective in reducing dental disease, in the long run the need for manpower and resources in these programs might be lowered to a point where they will become more cost-effective than private practices. If the two delivery modes are equally effective in reducing dental disease, however, results from the study indicate that private practices are more cost-effective and will probably maintain their cost-effective advantage over school-based programs.

Cost containment through risk-sharing by primary care physicians: a history of the development of United Healthcare.

A new type of independent practice association has been organized to encourage primary care physicians in private practice to become coordinators and financial managers for their patients' medical care. Each patient chooses one internist, family or general physician, or pediatrician and must be referred by that physician for all specialized care. The primary care physician authorizes payment from his/her own account for hospital and referral care provided to patients. He or she shares any deficit or surplus remaining at the end of the year. This is a background paper detailing the history of development and specific features contained in this new concept of putting the physician in charge and "at risk" for the costs of medical care to his/her patients. The plan has been operating in northern California, Washington, and Utah and has 40,000 members and 750 participating physicians. This historical background paper is part of a large project--State Employees' Insurance Benefits Utilization Study (SEIBUS) being done by the University of Washington School of Public Health to evaluate use and costs of medical care under this innovative plan.