Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

A reimbursement structure that can benefit primary care

Matthew Dyer
Policy
April 3, 2018
Share
Tweet
Share

By their nature, fee-for-service reimbursement schemes incentivize procedures over prevention. This creates a serious moral hazard: If you keep your patient panel healthy through early interventions and exhaustive lifestyle counseling, then there are fewer profitable procedures to do. On the other hand, if you let your patients become critically ill, then you will be rewarded handsomely for all of the (now) medically necessary procedures and tests that you can perform on them.

Third-party payers, such as private insurers and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), have attempted to temper this hazard over the years by imposing ever greater administrative pressure on providers and health care systems. Unfortunately, health care costs in the U.S. have continued to rise out of proportion to improvements in outcome. This suggests that administrative micromanagement of providers, no matter how intense, does not overcome the fundamental moral hazard of fee-for-service reimbursement.

An alternative reimbursement scheme called capitation does away with this moral hazard by paying a flat fee per patient per month to be distributed among all of the patient’s providers. If the patient’s medical issues are resolved under budget, providers get to keep the money saved. If the providers spend carelessly, they must eat the excess cost. This creates a direct incentive for providers to choose diagnostics and therapies wisely, thereby reducing wasteful spending and also reducing the need for administrative micromanagement — a win-win scenario for providers and patients. However, despite the likely cost savings that would come from capitation, it has been unfeasible on a large scale until recently.

The problem with reimbursement by capitation is that patients’ health care needs vary unpredictably. If providers are offered the same flat fee for each patient, then practices that see complex patients with above average needs run a very high risk of bankruptcy. Physicians would be incentivized to take on only healthy patients just to stay in business. Complex patients would be untreated, or they would be pushed back into fee-for-service arrangements, negating the usefulness of capitation.

In order for capitation to work for all patients, the monthly payment for each patient must accurately reflect the expected cost of their care. Predicting an individual patient’s future health care expenses is impossible; predicting the future costs of a group of patients is more feasible, especially when patients are pooled into very large groups, thus reducing the variance of the sample and averaging out the risks of overspending. Designing a system based on large risk pools requires an immense investment in statistical analysis, which has been quietly happening since at least the 1980s when CMS began building and analyzing huge data sets of Medicare patient records in order to devise a risk stratification scheme that predicts future costs based on current comorbidities. The end result, a risk adjustment system based on hierarchical condition categories (HCCs), finally went mainstream in 2017.

For primary care providers, it is crucial to understand the structure of risk and payments in the HCC system because the financial rewards of good preventive care in a capitation system will not automatically be passed down in the HCC system unless providers negotiate for their fair share of these rewards. As mentioned before, the HCC system can only predict average spending over a large cohort of patients with a given condition; the larger the group of patients pooled together, the smaller the variance in the sample, and the lower the risk of overspending (and therefore bankruptcy) due to random chance. In practice, even huge hospital systems are too small to buffer against this risk. Therefore, patients must be pooled together at the level of a large insurance policy that takes capitated payments from a larger payer such as CMS and then pays out individual patient bills from hospitals and providers. That means that the insurance company takes on the risk of overspending, but if it succeeds in cutting costs, it gets to keep the money saved.

Because insurance companies only control costs indirectly, they must find a way to motivate providers to cut costs for them; either they can continue using administrative pressure to force providers’ hands, or they can offer financial incentives to providers who save them money. In the former situation, administrative micromanagement continues, as does the moral hazard of fee-for-service reimbursements between providers and the insurer. In the latter situation, when the insurer shares its profits with providers who reduce wasteful spending, there is less conflict between finances and ethics, and there is less need for administrative pressure on providers. In other words, through profit-sharing arrangements, the benefits of capitation can be realized in the HCC-based system.

Providers employed in large health care systems may well discover that their employer has negotiated profit-sharing arrangements with HCC-based insurance policies, but the employer may not pass down the financial rewards to individual providers. Instead, the employer may elect to use administrative pressure to cut costs, keeping all net savings for its executives, or it may limit financial incentives to specific metrics such as compliance with screening recommendations. Providers who have grown inured to ever-encroaching administrative burdens may simply accept the increased micromanagement. However, primary care providers need to ask this question: would they more effectively lower health care costs if, instead of being pressured to meet standardized measures that are associated with good care, they were rewarded with a cut of the total costs saved by giving actual good care?

Providers who believe that effective health care cannot be neatly summed up in terms of measurable goals like A1C control and influenza vaccine compliance, who believe that there are subtle aspects of medical treatment that defy immediate documentation but lead to real, measurable benefits in the long run in terms of a patient’s health and medical expenses, who believe that they would do a better job of promoting health and reducing overall costs if they had greater autonomy and were rewarded appropriately for saving healthcare dollars through health promotion — these providers can and should negotiate for less micromanagement and more direct profit sharing in the HCC system.

Matthew Dyer is a medical student.

Image credit: Shutterstock.com

Prev

The future of primary care is as bright as we choose to make it

April 3, 2018 Kevin 0
…
Next

How to do risk-adjusted diagnosis coding the right way

April 3, 2018 Kevin 1
…

Tagged as: Primary Care, Public Health & Policy

Post navigation

< Previous Post
The future of primary care is as bright as we choose to make it
Next Post >
How to do risk-adjusted diagnosis coding the right way

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Matthew Dyer

  • Does federal law violate our right to health care?

    Matthew Dyer

Related Posts

  • Direct primary care is an answer to volume-based insurance reimbursement models

    Troy A. Burns, MD
  • Primary Care First: CMS develops a value-based primary care program for independent practices

    Robert Colton, MD
  • Primary care faces a very difficult winter

    Ken Terry
  • How the CPT system shortchanges primary care

    Richard Young, MD
  • Nurse practitioners will save primary care

    Leah Hellerstein, LCSW
  • The hidden work of primary care

    Michelle Nall, MPH, ANP-BC

More in Policy

  • How locum tenens work helps physicians and APPs reclaim control

    Brian Sutter
  • Why Medicaid cuts should alarm every doctor

    Ilan Shapiro, MD
  • Why physician voices matter in the fight against anti-LGBTQ+ laws

    BJ Ferguson
  • The silent toll of ICE raids on U.S. patient care

    Carlin Lockwood
  • What Adam Smith would say about America’s for-profit health care

    M. Bennet Broner, PhD
  • The lab behind the lens: Equity begins with diagnosis

    Michael Misialek, MD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Why removing fluoride from water is a public health disaster

      Steven J. Katz, DDS | Conditions
    • When did we start treating our lives like trauma?

      Maureen Gibbons, MD | Physician
    • Mastering medical presentations: Elevating your impact

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Physician
    • Why the pre-med path is pushing future doctors to the brink

      Jordan Williamson, MEd | Education
    • Why what doctors say matters more than you think [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The hidden incentives driving frivolous malpractice lawsuits

      Howard Smith, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why tracking cognitive load could save doctors and patients

      Hiba Fatima Hamid | Education
    • What the world must learn from the life and death of Hind Rajab

      Saba Qaiser, RN | Conditions
    • The silent toll of ICE raids on U.S. patient care

      Carlin Lockwood | Policy
    • Addressing the physician shortage: How AI can help, not replace

      Amelia Mercado | Tech
    • Why medical students are trading empathy for publications

      Vijay Rajput, MD | Education
    • Bureaucracy over care: How the U.S. health care system lost its way

      Kayvan Haddadan, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why the pre-med path is pushing future doctors to the brink

      Jordan Williamson, MEd | Education
    • Why the fear of being forgotten is stronger than the fear of death [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • How a rainy walk helped an oncologist rediscover joy and bravery

      Dr. Damane Zehra | Physician
    • How inspiration and family stories shape our most meaningful moments

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Physician
    • A day in the life of a WHO public health professional in Meghalaya, India

      Dr. Poulami Mazumder | Physician
    • Why women doctors are still mistaken for nurses

      Emma Fenske, DO | Physician

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 4 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Why removing fluoride from water is a public health disaster

      Steven J. Katz, DDS | Conditions
    • When did we start treating our lives like trauma?

      Maureen Gibbons, MD | Physician
    • Mastering medical presentations: Elevating your impact

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Physician
    • Why the pre-med path is pushing future doctors to the brink

      Jordan Williamson, MEd | Education
    • Why what doctors say matters more than you think [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The hidden incentives driving frivolous malpractice lawsuits

      Howard Smith, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why tracking cognitive load could save doctors and patients

      Hiba Fatima Hamid | Education
    • What the world must learn from the life and death of Hind Rajab

      Saba Qaiser, RN | Conditions
    • The silent toll of ICE raids on U.S. patient care

      Carlin Lockwood | Policy
    • Addressing the physician shortage: How AI can help, not replace

      Amelia Mercado | Tech
    • Why medical students are trading empathy for publications

      Vijay Rajput, MD | Education
    • Bureaucracy over care: How the U.S. health care system lost its way

      Kayvan Haddadan, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why the pre-med path is pushing future doctors to the brink

      Jordan Williamson, MEd | Education
    • Why the fear of being forgotten is stronger than the fear of death [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • How a rainy walk helped an oncologist rediscover joy and bravery

      Dr. Damane Zehra | Physician
    • How inspiration and family stories shape our most meaningful moments

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Physician
    • A day in the life of a WHO public health professional in Meghalaya, India

      Dr. Poulami Mazumder | Physician
    • Why women doctors are still mistaken for nurses

      Emma Fenske, DO | Physician

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

A reimbursement structure that can benefit primary care
4 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...