This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (7)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Anne G. Pereira, MD; Steven D. Pearson, MD, MSc

Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:1313-1317.

Background  Despite concern about the impact of financial incentives on physician behavior, little is known about patients' attitudes toward these incentives.

Objectives  To assess patient attitudes toward physician compensation models and to explore patient characteristics associated with these attitudes.

Methods  We mailed a survey to 2000 adult patients in a large New England health maintenance organization. We asked about their trust in their primary care physician; discomfort with compensation models of salary with withhold (salary), fee-for-service with withhold, and group capitation (capitation).

Results  One thousand one hundred twenty-five (56%) of the 2000 patients who responded expressed varying levels of discomfort with the proposed compensation models: 16% for salary, 25% for fee-for-service with withhold, and 53% for capitation (P<.001). Patients who knew their primary care physician was paid through capitation did not report less trust in their primary care physician but still frequently expressed discomfort (46%) with capitation. Among all respondents, those who were younger, white, had better health, had a higher income, were more educated, and who lacked a very trusting relationship with a primary care physician were more likely to report discomfort with both capitation and fee-for-service with withhold. In multivariable analyses, discomfort with capitation was more common among white patients (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-4.2), patients with incomes exceeding $20 000 (odds ratio, 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 2.3-6.1), and college-educated patients (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-2.7).

Conclusions  Most patients were uncomfortable with 1 or more of the 3 common methods used to pay physicians. Discomfort was highest with capitation and was more likely among wealthier, well-educated, white patients. With capitation increasing nationally, patients' concerns should be considered in the design of compensation agreements.

From the Center for Ethics in Managed Care, and the Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Boston, Mass.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Archives of Internal Medicine Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(10):1355-1356.
FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Cancer Care, Money, and the Value of Life: Whose Justice? Which Rationality?
Sulmasy
JCO 2007;25:217-222.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A trial of disclosing physicians' financial incentives to patients.
Pearson et al.
Arch Intern Med 2006;166:623-628.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

What do patients value in their hospital care? An empirical perspective on autonomy centred bioethics
Joffe et al.
J. Med. Ethics 2003;29:103-108.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Patients Uncomfortable with Physician Payment by Capitation
JWatch Emergency Med. 2001;2001:9-9.
FULL TEXT