The Road To Value Can't Be Paved With A Broken Medicare Physician Fee Schedule.

Value-based payment has been promoted for increasing quality, controlling spending, and improving patient and practitioner experience. Meanwhile, needed reforms to fee-for-service payment (the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule) have been ignored as policy makers seek to move payment toward alternatives, even though the fee schedule is an intrinsic part of Alternative Payment Models. In this article, we show how value-based payment and the fee schedule should be viewed as complementary, rather than as separate silos. We trace the origins of embedded flaws in the fee schedule that must be fixed if value-based payment is to succeed. These include payment distortions that directly compromise value by overpaying for certain procedures and imaging services while underpaying for services that add value for beneficiaries. We also show how the fee schedule can accommodate bundled payments and population-based payments that are central to Alternative Payment Models. We draw two conclusions. First, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should correct misvalued services and establish a hybrid payment for primary care that blends fee-for-service and population-based payment. Second, Congress should alter the thirty-five-year-old statutory basis for setting Medicare fees to allow CMS to explicitly consider policy priorities such as workforce shortages in refining fee levels.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Led To A Large Decline In Physician Gross Revenue Across All Specialties In 2020.

US health care use declined during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Although utilization is known to have recovered in 2021 and 2022, it is unknown how revenue in 2020-22 varied by physician specialty and practice setting. This study linked medical claims from a large national federation of commercial health plans to physician and practice data to estimate pandemic-associated impacts on physician revenue (defined as payments to eligible physicians) by specialty and practice characteristics. Surgical specialties, emergency medicine, and medical subspecialties each experienced a greater than 9 percent adjusted gross revenue decline in 2020 relative to prepandemic baselines. By 2022, pathology and psychiatry revenue experienced robust recovery, whereas surgical and oncology revenue remained at or below baseline. Revenue recovery in 2022 was greater for physicians practicing in hospital-owned practices and in practices participating in accountable care organizations. Pandemic-associated revenue recovery in 2021 and 2022 varied by specialty and practice type. Given that physician financial instability is associated with health care consolidation and leaving practice, policy makers should closely monitor revenue trends among physicians in specialties or practice settings with sustained gross revenue reductions during the pandemic.

A scenario based approach to optimizing cost-effectiveness of physician-staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Services compared to ground-based Emergency Medical Services in Finland.

OBJECTIVES: Since Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) is an expensive resource in terms of unit price compared to ground-based Emergency Medical Service (EMS), it is important to further investigate which methods would allow for the optimization of these services. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-staffed HEMS compared to ground-based EMS in developed scenarios with improvements in triage, aviation performance, and the inclusion of ischemic stroke patients. METHODS: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was assessed by comparing health outcomes and costs of HEMS versus ground-based EMS across six different scenarios. Estimated 30-day mortality and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to measure health benefits. Quality-of-Life (QoL) was assessed with EuroQoL instrument, and a one-way sensitivity analysis was carried out across different patient groups. Survival estimates were evaluated from the national FinnHEMS database, with cost analysis based on the most recent financial reports. RESULTS: The best outcome was achieved in Scenario 3.1 which included a reduction in over-alerts, aviation performance enhancement, and assessment of ischemic stroke patients. This scenario yielded 1077.07-1436.09 additional QALYs with an ICER of 33,703-44,937 €/QALY. This represented a 27.72% increase in the additional QALYs and a 21.05% reduction in the ICER compared to the current practice. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness of HEMS can be highly improved by adding stroke patients into the dispatch criteria, as the overall costs are fixed, and the cost-effectiveness is determined based on the utilization rate of capacity.

Can financial incentives improve access to care? Evidence from a French experiment on specialist physicians.

In France, addressing balance billing is essential for equitable healthcare access and reducing physician income disparities. The National Health Insurance (NHI) introduced financial incentive programs, namely the "Contract for Access to Care" (CAS) in 2014 and the "Option for Controlled Pricing" (OPTAM) in 2017, to encourage physicians to reduce extra fees and adhere to regulated prices. This study analyzed the impact of these programs on self-employed physicians using a comprehensive administrative dataset covering specialist physicians from 2005 to 2017. The dataset comprised 9891 surgical specialists (30,972 observations) and 6926 medical specialists (21,650 observations) between 2005 and 2017. Applying a difference-in-differences design with a two-way fixed effect model and matching through the "Coarsened Exact Matching" method, the study examined CAS and/or OPTAM membership effects on physicians' activity and fees. The results indicate that both the CAS and OPTAM successfully enhance access to care. Physicians treat more patients, particularly those with lower incomes who might have previously avoided care because of the extra fees. However, an increased patient load translates to a higher workload for physicians. Despite a fee increase, it was observed to be smaller than the surge in activity. Furthermore, if all physicians are appropriately rewarded for their efforts, this improvement in access comes at a cost to NHI. This study's findings provide crucial insights into the nuanced effects of these financial incentive programs on physicians' behavior, highlighting the tradeoff between improved access and increased NHI costs. Ultimately, these findings underscore the complexity of balancing financial incentives, physician workload, and healthcare accessibility in pursuit of a more equitable healthcare system.

Explaining why increases in generic use outpace decreases in brand name medicine use in multisource markets and the role of regulation.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems worldwide face escalating pharmaceutical expenditures despite interventions targeting pricing and generic substitution. Existing studies often overlook unwarranted volume increases in multisource markets due to differential physician perceptions of brand name and generics. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explain the outpacing of generic medicine use over brand name use in multisource markets and assess the regulatory role, specifically examining the impact of reference pricing on volume and intensity increases. METHODS: Analyzing German multisource prescription medicine markets from 2011 to 2014, we evaluate regulatory mechanisms and explore whether brand name and generic medicines constitute separate market segments. Using an Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition approach, we divide the differential in brand name versus generic medicine use rates into market structure and unobserved segment effects. RESULTS: Generic use rates surpass same-market brand name substitution by 3.87 prescriptions per physician and medicine, on average. Reference pricing mitigated volume increase, treatment intensity and expenditure. Disparities in quantity and expenditure dynamics between brand name and generic segments are partially explained by market structure and segment effects. CONCLUSION: Generic medicine use effectively reduces expenditures but contributes to increased net prescription rates. Reference pricing may control medicine use, but divergent physician perceptions of brand name and generics, revealed by identified segment effects, call for nuanced policy interventions.

Industry Payments to Physicians Endorsing Drugs and Devices on a Social Media Platform.

This study evaluates adherence to industry and professional standards among physicians endorsing drugs and devices on a social media platform.

The Estimated Cost-Effectiveness of Physician-Staffed Helicopter Emergency Medical Services Compared to Ground-Based Emergency Medical Services in Finland.

OBJECTIVE: Because the unit cost of helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) is higher than traditional ground-based emergency medical services (EMS), it is important to further investigate the impact of HEMS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physician-staffed HEMS compared with ground-based EMS in Finland under current practices. METHODS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was evaluated using the differences in outcomes and costs between HEMS and ground-based EMS. The estimated mortality within 30 days and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to measure health benefits. Quality of life was estimated according to the EuroQoL scale, and a 1-way sensitivity analysis was conducted on the QALY indexes ranging from 0.6 to 0.8. Survival rates were calculated according to the national HEMS database, and the cost structure was estimated at 48 million euros based on financial statements. RESULTS: HEMS prevented the 30-day mortality of 68.1 patients annually, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €43,688 to €56,918/QALY. Fixed costs accounted for 93% of HEMS expenses because of 24/7 operations, making the capacity utilization rate a major determinant of total costs. CONCLUSION: HEMS intervention is cost-effective compared with ground-based EMS and is acceptable from a societal willingness-to-pay perspective. These findings contribute valuable insights for health care management decision making and highlight the need for future research for service optimization.

Physician-Based Approaches to Price Transparency: A Solution in Search of a Problem?

Physician-based transparency approaches have been advanced as a strategy for informing patients of the likely financial consequences of using services. The structure of health care pricing and insurance coverage, and the low uptake of existing tools, suggest these approaches are likely to be unwieldy and unsuccessful. They may also generate new ethical challenges.

Trends in Industry-Sponsored Research Payments to Physician Principal Investigators.

This cohort study investigates trends in total and per-physician industry-sponsored research payments to physician principal investigators from 2015 to 2022.

How medical insurance payment systems affect the physicians' provision behavior in China-based on experimental economics.

Background: It introduced an artefactual field experiment to analyze the influence of incentives from fee-for-service (FFS) and diagnosis-intervention package (DIP) payments on physicians' provision of medical services. Methods: This study recruited 32 physicians from a national pilot city in China and utilized an artefactual field experiment to examine medical services provided to patients with different health status. Results: In general, the average quantities of medical services provided by physicians under the FFS payment were higher than the optimal quantities, the difference was statistically significant. While the average quantities of medical services provided by physicians under the DIP payment were very close to the optimal quantities, the difference was not statistically significant. Physicians provided 24.49, 14.31 and 5.68% more medical services to patients with good, moderate and bad health status under the FFS payment than under the DIP payment. Patients with good, moderate and bad health status experienced corresponding losses of 5.70, 8.10 and 9.42% in benefits respectively under the DIP payment, the corresponding reductions in profits for physicians were 10.85, 20.85 and 35.51%. Conclusion: It found patients are overserved under the FFS payment, but patients in bad health status can receive more adequate treatment. Physicians' provision behavior can be regulated to a certain extent under the DIP payment and the DIP payment is suitable for the treatment of patients in relatively good health status. Doctors sometimes have violations under DIP payment, such as inadequate service and so on. Therefore, it is necessary to innovate the supervision of physicians' provision behavior under the DIP payment. It showed both medical insurance payment systems and patients with difference health status can influence physicians' provision behavior.

The cost of influence: How gifts to physicians shape prescriptions and drug costs.

This paper investigates the influence of gifts - monetary and in-kind payments - from drug firms to US physicians on prescription behavior and drug costs. Using causal models and machine learning, we estimate physicians' heterogeneous responses to payments on antidiabetic prescriptions. We find that payments lead to increased prescription of brand drugs, resulting in a cost rise of $23 per dollar value of transfer received. Paid physicians show higher responses when they treat higher proportions of patients receiving a government-funded low-income subsidy that lowers out-of-pocket drug costs. We estimate that introducing a national gift ban would reduce diabetes drug costs by 2%.

It's a jungle out there: Understanding physician payment and its role in group dynamics.

Although collaboration between healthcare professionals is essential for the delivery of effective, efficient, and high-quality care, it remains an ongoing and critical challenge across health systems. As a result, many countries are experimenting with innovative payment and employment models. The literature tends to focus on improving collaboration across organizational and sectoral boundaries, and largely ignores potential barriers to collaborative work between members of the same profession within a single organization. Despite intergroup dynamics and professional boundaries having been shown to restrict patient flow and collaboration between specialties, studies have so far tended to overlook the potential effects of differentiated organizational and payment models on physicians' behaviors and intergroup dynamics. In the present study, we seek to unpack the influence of physicians' payment and employment models on their collaborative behaviors and on intergroup dynamics between specialties, adding to the current scholarship on physician payment and employment by considering how physicians' view and act in response to different structural arrangements. The findings suggest that adopting hybrid models, in which physicians are employed or paid differently within the same organization or practice, creates a bifurcation of the profession whereby physicians across different models are perceived to behave differently and have conflicting professional values. These models are perceived to inhibit collaboration between physicians and complicate hospital governance, restricting the ability to move towards new models of care delivery. These findings can be used as a basis for future work that aims to unpack the reality of physician payment and offer important insights for policies surrounding physician employment.