1 / 25

Agenda

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.

trynt
Download Presentation

Agenda

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. 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

  2. Why are hospitals employing physicians? • Declining Reimbursements • Health System Consolidation • Meaningful Use • Medical School Debt • Work Life Balance • Vacation, Benefits & Retirement Savings

  3. 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

  4. MGMA Trends - Comp Methodology

  5. MGMA – FP & Gen Surgery

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. MGMA Survey Demographics Ohio = 4.3% Source: MGMA 2011, Physician Compensation and Production Survey

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. Net Income Example

  13. 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

  14. Medicare C/F History 2000-2012 • Medicare conversion factor (CF) has decreased by 7% since 2000

  15. 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

  16. 2012 CMS Allowable & MGMA (I.E. FP)

  17. Adjusting wRVU Production • Potential overpayment to physicians • Necessary adjustments to wRVUs • Charge Entry Errors • Denial Adjustments • Global Services • Not Medically Necessary

  18. Adjusting work RVU values (C/E & Denials)

  19. 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

  20. 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

  21. 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

  22. 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

  23. 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

  24. What Comp Plan is Best?

  25. Questions / Comments Thank You

More Related