About Health Care Industry

BNET Healthcare provides daily industry trends and news coverage with insights for managers and executives, focusing on major health care providers, hospitals and facilities, insurance companies, and medical device manufacturers. In addition to detailed company profiles, you will find detailed industry analysis on new alliances and partnerships, healthcare products, medical patents, health care cost control, lawsuits, management and board changes, and all other important business issues.

Right-Sizing The Physician Workforce

By Ken Terry | Oct 11, 2009

Over the weekend, I noticed an op-ed piece in the Denver Times entitled “Doctor shortage would pull plug on healthcare reform.” According to its author, Alex Jurek, Congress should not try to expand insurance coverage because we don’t have enough primary-care physicians to handle the influx of newly insured patients. I disagree with Jurek on the need for reform, but he does make a good point about the physician workforce challenge that it would pose.

In Massachusetts, Jurek observes, reform has created a bottleneck for access to primary-care physicians:

“Almost half a million new patients showed up in doctors’ offices and emergency rooms in that state. The average wait for a visit with a primary care physician ballooned to 50 days. Emergency room utilization rates increased, too, by 14 percent. And Massachusetts has the highest density of physicians per capita.”

That sounds about right–although let’s bear in mind that much of that physician density represents the unusually high number of specialists in Massachusetts. It is also true that, because specialists earn so much more than primary-care doctors, it is going to be difficult to induce more young physicians to go into primary care–not only in Massachusetts, but across the country.

Even under current conditions, the American Association of Medical Colleges predicts a shortage of 124,000 physicians in 15 years, and the American Academy of Family Physicians forecasts a shortage of 40,000 family docs within a decade, Jurek notes. Reform, in his view, will greatly exacerbate these shortfalls.

The problem with this outlook is that it assumes we’re going to have the same kind of healthcare system in 10 or 15 years that we do today. But if predictions about insurance costs doubling in the next decade come true, the system will have to change, or few people will be able to afford health care. So, while I agree that primary-care physicians will find it difficult to cope with millions of new patients, the crunch might ease as the system is restructured.

Jonathan Weiner, a health policy expert at Johns Hopkins, provided an insight into how that might affect the physician workforce in a paper he wrote about HMO staffing. Using data culled from Kaiser Permanente’s eight prepaid group practices, which then served 8 million enrollees, he found that their physician-to-population ratio was between 22 and 37 percent lower than the national ratio. Other studies have shown that the quality of care at Kaiser is comparable to that in other health care settings. So while it’s unlikely that the whole country is going to move toward the Kaiser model, we might not need more physicians if they were organized differently and redistributed more evenly across geographical regions.

We do need more primary-care physicians, and there are provisions in the reform bills that seek to make primary care more attractive to doctors. But, whatever comes out of Congress will be only the first step toward real reform. The next step will be to change the method of provider reimbursement so that in areas where there are too many doctors, they can’t simply create more work for themselves. When that shift occurs, the workforce will begin to right-size itself.

Ken Terry, a former senior editor at Medical Economics Magazine, is the author of the book Rx For Health Care Reform. follow all BNET Healthcare posts on Twitter.

BNET User Analysis

Web Buzz:
  • Think tank offers recommendations for expanding primary care rolls

    FierceHealthcare - 19 days 15 hours 12 minutes ago

    As reform discussions steam on, one issue that keeps popping up is how the system will generate enough primary-care physicians to cope with the influx of newly-insured patients.  It's not just a long-term planning issue either. In Massachusetts, patients faced waits of weeks, or even months, to enter primary-care practices in the wake of...

  • The State of America's Health Care, Through the Eyes of Physicians

    Health Populi - 293 days 18 hours 50 minutes ago

    America's internal medicine physicians have a prescription for reforming the U.S. health system. It's a chicken-in-every-pot solution of: 1. A primary care doctor, and2. Affordable and accessible health care for all. This solution comes out of the American College of Physicians ' (ACPs') view that primary care is in crisis mode in the U.S....

  • Health Affairs Blog Top 10 Posts For April

    Health Affairs - 203 days 10 hours 27 minutes ago

    Health reform tops the most-read list for April on the Health Affairs Blog. A series of posts on health IT looked at building the new technology into the delivery system, effect on patient-physician relationships, and more. Additional commenting is always welcome. This entry was posted on Monday, May 4th, 2009 at 3:19 pm and is filed under All...

  • Health Clinic Conditions May Be To Blame For Decrease In Primary Care Physicians

    ScienceDaily - 137 days 20 hours 46 minutes ago

    ScienceDaily (July 8, 2009) ? Adverse work conditions may be to blame for the decline in the number of primary care physicians nationwide, according to a study published in the latest issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine. “Unfavorable work conditions are associated with stress, burnout and intent to leave for primary care physicians,”...

  • America's primary health care backbone needs reinvestment and re-imagining

    Health Populi - 18 days 12 hours 48 minutes ago

    59% of U.S. physicians say their patients have difficulty paying for health care and medicines. The foot soldiers of American health care are front-line primary care physicians (PCPs). Compared to their colleagues in ten other developed countries, American PCPs say their nation is far behind other countries' health systems in at least three...

 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    merlinpendragon

    10/12/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Right-Sizing The Physician Workforce

    Thanks for this note on real reform. We actually knew back in the early 80s that integration was key as bundled payment sent to a delivery system that was coordinated could create savings for themselves and also improve care. But that failed as hospitals could not get it through their head that less occupancy made for lower expenses and continued to either wait until complications got worse ( see brent james at Intermountan) or billed for things at more that they were paid and wrote off the rest. All of these Accountable health organizations, medical homes and PPG are the same thing. We keep doing it over and over again. Its health delivery reform that is needed not just benefits reform as Gingrich and others have tried, We are back in 1979 again and those of us that worked in Health plan development ( prepaid movement) see the whole thing evolving again. What I am thankful for is I learned at the hands of true genius level people with ethics in a not for profit HMO. Care came first, profit second, we need to swing that pendulum back
    WJD

  •  
    2

    verycold

    10/14/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Right-Sizing The Physician Workforce

    Terry, the republicans have pointed out for many months that actual shortage of physicians that currently is happening and thus will become even worse. Books have been written about this problem. Anybody with half a brain knows it is true, and yet our government wanting to appear capable and on top of things stampedes ahead without checking to see if they can even handle more patients in this health care system. If it is true that many physicians anticipating more patients for less money plan to exit the profession our shortage will become even worse. BTW, the medical community coupled with our educational system engineered this shortage when they kept medical programs small and nearly impossible to get into to. Our town alone has a 2 year waiting list for nurses. Didn't any of these fantastic brains look out and see all those baby boomers coming?

    Nobody is denying that health care needs to be improved and in some cases changed completely. I am all for that. What I am not happy about is leaping before we know how to pay for this and refusing to really be honest about what these changes will mean for the average American.

    The idea that those with insurance that now are supposedly paying for the uninsured at the rate of 1500 yearly will see their premiums lowered is silly and insulting. We all know this reform will cost considerably more than is being forecast. Although I heard last night that the Part D of Medicare has come in about 40 percent less than anticipated by the CBO. If that is true, we should look closely at why that assessment was not accurate. If it is not true, then it is one more government lie. I would have to do some research to find out the possible truth. Terry you might know this?

    This is just an observation. A few months ago my husband went into the hospital to have a procedure done. When we arrived it was a fairly busy atmosphere. He had several nurses that apparently in some capacity were responsible for him. I was bored and so I took a long walk around the hospital. I was looking to see how much of the hospital was busy. So it was around 1 p.m. I would say not terribly busy and by 3 not a soul around. This is a huge hospital part of the Mayo clinic in MN. There was miles of empty offices, rooms, waiting areas, etc. Is this why costs are so high? If those fixed costs so high with so little business? When you think of efficiencies you want a hospital large enough to support the population but not so big that large segments of it just stand empty.



  •  
    3

    2TallTexan

    10/14/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Right-Sizing The Physician Workforce

    Here's a factoid: Health Care cannot be reformed as the Liberals want it without a total restructure of how we "do" medicine. Having lived in several European countries where "universal health care" is practiced, I can tell you that their many years of experience have resulted in most of them having pretty much the same type of set up:
    1) Each country limits the number of specialist that can graduate each year. Since specialists are much higher paid, generally speaking, than family practitioners, they drive the cost of healthcare up. Additionally, with the influx of millions of new users of health care, this limiting of specialties forces those who want to come into medicine to do so as general practitioners. In a further attempt to reduce cost, some of these countries limit the amount doctors (who are national employees) can make. As you might expect, this combination of cost reducers has a detrimental impact on the number of people who want to be doctors. Those who do stay supplement their income by conducting an "after hour" private practice, where they see patients who either have private insurance (if not outlawed as it is in England), or have the monetary means.
    2) Most countries with nationalized medicine prohibit the use of private insurers. Those few countries which still allow such insurance, the rates are very high ... so only the pretty well off can afford it anyway. Cutting the private insurance as an option forces everyone onto the Govt plans. This will happen, too, in the U.S. as the cost of nationalized medicine continues to soar, and Congress is looking for ways to reduce costs. There's a reason why all the other countries have done likewise ... and we're no different/smarter than they are.
    3) The best medicines will not be available. New medicines are normally much more expensive than those which have been around for years. The cost of developing and getting FDA approval can be in the hundreds of millions of dollars; so pharmaceutical companies charge more for new drugs to jump start getting a return on investment. So, most all countries will nationalized medicine will not offer the "latest and greatest" new drug--regardless of the disease or associated mortality rate. A great example of this is in England, where it wasn't until just this year that patients there began receiving a new drug for cancer. Folks in the USA have been using it for the past 3-5 years, with great results. People in Britain were dying because they didn't have access to this drug. Why? It was deemed to be "too expensive" by those who were in charge of deciding what drugs would be administered in their health care system. While such actions are not exactly tantamount to "Death Panels" some have alluded to when talking about potential U.S. Health Care bills, it's not that far of a throw to get there.
    4) Long waits for treatment. Dump 30 million new users into our health system ... make medicine "free ... and you have the "perfect storm." Wait-times will explode. It took me 6 weeks just to get an appointment so that I could make an appointment to be seen by a gastroenterologist while I was living in Italy. After suffering from diarrhea for nearly a month, I needed some medical help. So when I found that I had to wait another 3 months to be seen, I went and camped out in an emergency room at the local hospital for a day and a half. I was there with about 60 other people.

    5) Speaking of emergency rooms, you'll hear people say that we need to get folks out of the emergency rooms and to a health care provider. That's what we'll do when we revamp our health care system. Sorry ... ain't gonna happen. Every country that has nationalized medicine also has emergency rooms pretty much filled to the max. Not only did the numbers not drop, they went up after health care reform was inacted? Why, you ask? Because, when the whole country's population is covered ... and there's no charge ... and there's a shortage of doctors (remember, we're dumping millions more into the healthcare system and we're also creating an environment where fewer people want to be docs) ... and the wait for an appointment can be months ... then people are going to head to the emergency rooms ... as I did.
    I could go on, but the simple fact is that we can't get there from here (there being Nationalized medicine) if we don't totally change the way we get our care. My guess is that the majority of Americans are NOT willing to make such a sacrifice in order to make sure all Americans are covered. Polls show that 85%+ of Americans say they're happy with their current insurance. So, I'd say those in Congress are in for a big, big fight if they try to cram such radical change down the throats of Americans. It won't be pretty.

  •  
    4

    verycold

    10/15/09 | Report as spam

    RE: Right-Sizing The Physician Workforce

    2Tall - I agree. Instead of limiting specialists they should have encouraged a heck of a lot more to enter the field. I mean how hard is this to realize that if there is only one specialist in town he is going to be crazy busy and can pretty much dictate the price he charges for his time. If he was competing with 100 other guys/gals the prices by way of natural forces would become contained. At least there is an argument for this.

    The truth is hip surgery for a 90 year old is not economically a sound decision and won't be allowed. Medicines that cost a lot for the elderly will not be available. Rationing has been there all along and now it will get worse. It has to. There is simply too many aged people that will be needing considerably more health care than they have thus far and not nearly enough healthy young people to support that burden.

    So in reality health care as many have known it will fade. It will become basic health care with few frills. Lack of population control,meaning even a discussion, has been irresponsible. Back in the 70s many of us were told to curb those families. Remember zero population growth? When our economy improved from the Carter days everybody forgot the population discussion and forgot about the energy crisis.

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
advertisement