Study to gauge effect of payments, productivity

How do different risk-bearing arrangements with payers impact physician productivity? That’s the central focus of a study being conducted by the University of Washington in Seattle and the Center for Research in Ambulatory Health Care Administration (CRASCA) of the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) in Englewood, CO.

MGMA’s research center will analyze data from as many as 500 group practices representing 8,000 physicians and conduct interviews with an administrator, clinical leader, and physicians from 48 medical groups in Washington, Oregon, California, and Wisconsin. The study will compare the effects of capitation, fee for service, and other methods of compensation on provider productivity.

Are patients helped?

The impact on quality of care and clinical outcomes are also important issues that may be addressed in further research, says Neill F. Piland, DrPH, CRASCA research director and co-investigator of the study.

"It’s not the amount of resources being consumed within the system that is of key importance, but whether the system restores patients to their highest level of health without wasting resources," he says. "That’s something we’d like to look at in a future phase."

The study is making use of data collected by MGMA in its annual surveys on physician productivity and compensation and cost.

MGMA recently began collecting data on hours and weeks worked, including time spent with direct patient care, hours in support of direct patient care, and other items (such as research, teaching, and administrative). The organization also collects data on charges, encounters, and resource-based relative value scale units.