NYT article: "Trying to Save by Increasing Doctors’ Fees"

[NonTradMed]

---

Members do not see this ad.

There's a NYT article about a new experiment insurance companies are trying out which increases doctors' pay to save on unnecessary tests, specialist visits etc.

A snippet:

Cutting health costs by paying doctors more?

That is the premise of experiments under way by federal and state government agencies and many insurers around the country. The idea is that by paying family physicians, internists and pediatricians to devote more time and attention to their patients, insurers and patients can save thousands of dollars downstream on unnecessary tests, visits to expensive specialists and avoidable trips to the hospital.

Any thoughts?

 

[MOHS_01]

Noble intention, and good in theory, yet I believe that increased face to face time with a primary care MD will be largely ineffective in reducing disease burden and thus costs. You can talk with people until you are blue in the face about diet, weight control, blood sugar control, photoprotection, etc, but people will continue being people and will, in large part, not listen.

As long as "someone else" is footing the healthcare bill we are entrenched in the current state of "health" and its associated problems. The separation of "payer" and "consumer" has led to an apathetic attitude toward health.

 

[cpants]

Noble intention, and good in theory, yet I believe that increased face to face time with a primary care MD will be largely ineffective in reducing disease burden and thus costs. You can talk with people until you are blue in the face about diet, weight control, blood sugar control, photoprotection, etc, but people will continue being people and will, in large part, not listen.

As long as "someone else" is footing the healthcare bill we are entrenched in the current state of "health" and its associated problems. The separation of "payer" and "consumer" has led to an apathetic attitude toward health.

I agree that it will not necessarily cut down on the diseases people have, but it could cut down on some costs. Perhaps some increased face time will permit PCP's to make more diagnoses without ordering expensive imaging studies and lab tests.

 

[Miami_med]

Well, it really depends in part on the clinical skills of the PCPs, along with their respective risk tolerances to getting sued if the physical exam is less sensitive than the CT scanner.

 

[DireWolf]

Well, it really depends in part on the clinical skills of the PCPs, along with their respective risk tolerances to getting sued if the physical exam is less sensitive than the CT scanner.

Exactly. I guess the powers that be don't realize doctors order unnecessary tests to avoid litigation. Meaningful tort reform is the only solution to cut down on unnecessary testing.

 

[DrJosephKim]

Variations on pay-4-performance or penalty-4-unnecessary testing.

Some payers were even penalizing providers for ordering unnecessary tests. So many tests get ordered because of the fear of litigation. Philly is one of the worst cities when it comes to medical litigation.