The future of value-based reimbursement in healthcare is murky. As recently as a few years ago, CMS was sharing a goal of 50% of reimbursement tied to value-based programs by 2018.
One presidential election and one Secretary of Health and Human Services later and now here we are...but where exactly is that on the road to value-based reimbursement?
We can be sure of one thing, at least: physician compensation often does NOT align with value based endpoints. That's the current state.
Physicians like me, of course, will say it doesn't make sense to put our compensation on the hook when MANY of the reasons for different quality outcomes are outside of our control. (That's the old "bad system beats a good doctor every time" idea. For more on that, click here.)
Regardless of whether everyone agrees or no, the recent physician compensation data released by Merritt Hawkins (click the link beneath for the full Medscape article) highlights that fee-for-service (volume incentive) based pay still reigns supreme in physician compensation.
Remember, I've shared plenty of practical tools (and stories about using them in healthcare) in the recent book Volume To Value. Have a look for some practical stories about using advanced quality tools to help improve value in healthcare. After all, even if value based reimbursement seems a bit farther away with all the recent changes, improving quality and value for patients is still the right thing to do.
(Credit photo accompanying this article and link beneath to Medscape!)
the old FFS world is still the norm, and value-based pay plays such a tiny, timid role that it's not yet an effective incentive for physicians to change how they practice, a new survey by the recruiting firm Merritt Hawkins suggests. The company reports that in 72% of the jobs it was trying to fill in the 12 months ending March 31, 2017, physicians were offered a salary and a "production bonus" (the rest were offered a straight salary, an income guarantee, or something else).