250 likes | 313 Views
Agenda. Limitations when using national data Different compensation plans (Pros and Cons) Why work RVU’s need to be adjusted to reflect practice results. How to determine an appropriate conversion factor How and when quality measures can be easily incorporated Recruiting incentives.
E N D
Agenda • Limitations when using national data • Different compensation plans (Pros and Cons) • Why work RVU’s need to be adjusted to reflect practice results. • How to determine an appropriate conversion factor • How and when quality measures can be easily incorporated • Recruiting incentives
Why are hospitals employing physicians? • Declining Reimbursements • Health System Consolidation • Meaningful Use • Medical School Debt • Work Life Balance • Vacation, Benefits & Retirement Savings
Sources of Physician Compensation • Medical Group Management Association • Physician and Production Survey • Cost Survey • American Medical Group Association • Sullivan Cotter • The Advisory Board • Other Surveys
Using MGMA data • PROS • The information reported is generally accepted across the medical industry • wRVU values are consistent across the nation • Able to provide historical comparisons over many years (founded in 1926, changed name to MGMA in 1963) • CONS • Compensation data does not include regional fluctuations • Relatively small sample sizes • Generally assumed, you only get “the best of the best” to participate in the survey • Data gathered is subject to the interpretation of the individual providing the information
MGMA – Employed Physicians 47% • Production Survey • Reports on charges, collections, compensation • Published in November using survey results from the previous year • 2011 report, 59,375 providers reported, 2,562 from Ohio, or 4.31% • Cost Survey • Provides a “mini-income statement” for many common specialties • Published in November using previous year’s data • 2011 report, 1,633 practices reported, 33 from Ohio, or 2.02% 24% Source: MGMA 2003 – 2011, Physician Compensation and Production Survey
MGMA Survey Demographics Ohio = 4.3% Source: MGMA 2011, Physician Compensation and Production Survey
Straight Salary • Generally reserved for new graduates • Start-up markets or practices • Medical Education (Academic Institutes) • Pros - • Easier to recruit physicians – guaranteed compensation • Protects physicians from poor payer mix • Cons- • No production incentive • Lacks expense control incentives • No organizational alignment
Net Income Model • Revenue Less Expenses • Generally reserved for established physicians • Pros - • Production incentive • Incentivizes physicians to maintain expenses • Cons - • Harder to recruit physicians – at risk • Penalizes providers for poor payer mix • Lacks organizational alignment
Net Income Model (+ market adjustment) • Credit Revenue • Payer mix credit • Reimbursement credit • Pros - • Production incentive • Incentivizes physicians to maintain expenses • Protects physicians from payer mix • Protects physicians from poor reimbursement • Cons - • Complicated to calculate – numerous iterations of financial modeling to determine market adjustment factor
Production Incentives - wRVU • Generally reserved for established practices • Increasing in popularity • Pros - • Production incentive for physicians • Protection from poor payer mix • Cons - • Does not incentivize physicians to manage expenses • Penalizes providers for poor payer mix • Lacks organizational alignment
Medicare C/F History 2000-2012 • Medicare conversion factor (CF) has decreased by 7% since 2000
GPCI and Medicare’s Allowable Amount Practice Expense GPCI Medicare’s Allowable (2011) – 99213 47% 50% 3% wRVU (.97) X GPCI (.998) PE (1.03) X GPCI (.927) MP (.05) X GPCI (1.24) $68.28 $36.8729
Adjusting wRVU Production • Potential overpayment to physicians • Necessary adjustments to wRVUs • Charge Entry Errors • Denial Adjustments • Global Services • Not Medically Necessary
Quality Metrics • 62% of MGMA physicians include incentive based compensation plans tied to quality metrics • Physician comp plans include between 1% and 10% at risk for quality measures (2011, Merritt Hawkins)update
Recruiting Trends • Primary care remains top priority for past 7 years • Psychiatrist are 3rd on the list • General Surgeons are 5th on the list Source: Merritt Hawkins. 2012 Review of Physician Recruiting Incentives
Compensation Trends • 7% of placements featured income guarantees • Down from 21% in 2006/2007 • 75% of placement featured salary with production bonus • 54% of those based on wRVUs • 35% include quality based component • Up from 7% the previous year • Signing bonus and relocations remain standard Source: Merritt Hawkins. 2012 Review of Physician Recruiting Incentives
Guidelines – Developing a Comp Model • Keep it simple (back of the napkin) • Compensation model must be objective • Consider hospital and physician alignment • Include quality incentives • Patient Satisfaction • Peer Reviews • Quality Outcome
Implementation • Physician buy-in is essential to developing a successful compensation model • Create a compensation committee that includes cross-specialty physicians and hospital administration • Create shadow compensation reports. (3-6 months prior to implementation) • Implement quality metrics percentage slowly. • Year 1 =5% of total comp • Year 2 = 10% of total comp
Questions / Comments Thank You