Annals of Family Medicine Annals Impact Factor is 4.5
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Annals of Family Medicine 2:S1-S21 (2004)
© 2004 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.
doi: 10.1370/afm.237

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow TRACK Comments: Submit a response
Right arrow TRACK Comments: View responses
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when TRACK Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Spann, S. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Spann, S. J.

Report on Financing the New Model of Family Medicine

Stephen J. Spann, MD, MBA for the members of Task Force 6 and The Executive Editorial Team*

Chair, Task Force 6, Houston, Tex.

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Stephen J. Spann, MD, MBA Department of Family and Community Medicine Baylor College of Medicine 3701 Kirby Houston, TX 77098 sspann{at}bcm.tmc.edu

PURPOSE To foster redesigning the work and workplaces of family physicians, this Future of Family Medicine task force was created to formulate and recommend a financial model that sustains and promotes a thriving New Model of care by focusing on practice reimbursement and health care finances. The goals of the task force were to develop a financial model that assesses the impact of the New Model on practice finances, and to recommend health care financial policies that, if implemented, would be expected to promote the New Model and the primary medical care function in the United States for the next few decades.

METHODS The members of the task force reflected a wide range of professional backgrounds and expertise. The group met in person on 2 occasions and communicated by e-mail and conference calls to achieve consensus. A marketing study was carried out using focus groups to test the concept of the New Model with consumers. External consultants with expertise in health economics, health care finance, health policy, and practice management were engaged to assist the task force with developing the microeconomic (practice level) and macroeconomic (societal level) financial models necessary to achieve its goals. Model assumptions were derived from the published medical literature, existing practice management databases, and discussions with experienced physicians and other content experts. The results of the financial modeling exercise are included in this report. The initial draft report of the findings and recommendations was shared with a reactor panel representing a broad spectrum of constituencies. Feedback from these individuals was reviewed and incorporated, as appropriate, into the final report.

RESULTS The practice-level financial model suggests that full implementation of the New Model of care within the current fee-for-service system of reimbursement would result in a 26% increase in compensation (from $167,457 to $210,288 total annual compensation) for prototypical family physicians who maintain their current number of work hours. Alternatively, physicians could choose to decrease their work hours by 12% and maintain their current compensation. This result is sensitive to physician practice group size. The societal level financial model shows that modifications in the current reimbursement system could lead to further improvements in compensation for family physicians practicing the New Model of care. Reimbursement for e-visits and chronic disease management could further increase total annual compensation to $229,849 for prototypical family physicians maintaining their current number of work hours. The widespread introduction of quality-based physician incentive bonus payments similar to some current programs that have been implemented on a limited basis could further increase total annual compensation up to $254,500. The adoption of a mixed reimbursement model, which would add an annual per-patient fee, a chronic care bonus, and an overall performance bonus to the current reimbursement system, could increase total annual compensation for the prototypical family physician continuing the current number of hours worked to as much as $277,800, a 66% increase above current compensation levels. The cost of transition to the New Model is estimated to range from $23,442 to $90,650 per physician, depending on the assumed magnitude of productivity loss associated with implementing an electronic health record. The financial impact of enhanced use of primary care on the costs of health care in the United States was estimated. If every American used a primary care physician as their usual source of care, health care costs would likely decrease by 5.6%, resulting in national savings of $67 billion dollars per year, with an improvement in the quality of the health care provided.

CONCLUSIONS Family physicians could use New Model efficiency to increase compensation or to reduce work time. There are alternative reimbursement methodologies compatible with the New Model that would allow family physicians to share in the health care cost savings achieved as a result of effective and efficient delivery of care. The New Model of care should enhance health care while propelling the US system toward improved performance and results that are satisfying to patients, health care professionals, purchasers, and payers. The New Model needs to be implemented now. Given the recognized need for improvements in the US health care system in the areas of quality, safety, access and costs, there is no reason to delay.

Key Words: Family practice • primary health care • family medicine • medical informatics • patient-centered care • practice management • quality of health care • health care costs • reimbursement • incentive • economics




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Board Fam MedHome page
R. Jaber, A. Braksmajer, and J. S. Trilling
Group visits: a qualitative review of current research.
J Am Board Fam Med, May 1, 2006; 19(3): 276 - 290.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
K. C. Stange
In This Issue: Glimpses of a Transformed Model of Care
Ann. Fam. Med, March 1, 2006; 4(2): 98 - 100.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
A. Gottschalk and S. A. Flocke
Time Spent in Face-to-Face Patient Care and Work Outside the Examination Room
Ann. Fam. Med, November 1, 2005; 3(6): 488 - 493.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
V. Gilchrist, G. McCord, S. L. Schrop, B. D. King, K. F. McCormick, A. M. Oprandi, B. A. Selius, M. Cowher, R. Maheshwary, F. Patel, et al.
Physician Activities During Time Out of the Examination Room
Ann. Fam. Med, November 1, 2005; 3(6): 494 - 499.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
L. A. Green
Prescription for Health: Round 1 Initial Results
Ann. Fam. Med, July 1, 2005; 3(suppl_2): S2 - S3.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
K. C. Stange
Stimulus, Response, Interpretation
Ann. Fam. Med, March 1, 2005; 3(2): 177 - 179.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
K. C. Stange
In This Issue: New Model Finances, Systematic Reviews, Patients and Health Care
Ann. Fam. Med, November 1, 2004; 2(6): 530 - 531.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
K. C. Stange
On TRACK
Ann. Fam. Med, March 1, 2004; 2(2): 177 - 179.
[Full Text] [PDF]

TRACK Comments:

Read all TRACK Comments

Productivity and Malpractce
Christine R. Barstad
Annals of Family Medicine, 28 Jan 2005 [Full text]
Re: Productivity and Malpractce
Stephen J. Spann, et al.
Annals of Family Medicine, 9 Feb 2005 [Full text]



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the Annals of Family Medicine.