This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Health Policy  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

From the results of a survey, McCormick et al¹ conclude that a single-payer national health insurance is more acceptable to physicians than a managed care or fee-for-service system. Part of this conclusion was based on the willingness of physicians to accept a 10% fee reduction or a 10% salary reduction in exchange for the postulated benefits of the new payment method including, most significantly, paperwork reduction. Of the physicians surveyed, 67% stated that they would accept a fee reduction and 57% would accept a salary reduction. Why two thirds of physicians accepted a system that is likely to cost them twice as much was not explained.

For a practicing physician with a 50% overhead earning $140 000 per year, a 10% salary reduction results in a $14 000 loss. For the same physician, a 10% reduction in fees causes a $28 000 loss or a 20% reduction in salary. The difference between fees . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Alexander C. Chester, MD

Correspondence: Dr Chester, Georgetown University Medical Center, 3301 New Mexico Ave NW, Suite 348, Washington, DC 20016 (achester@foxhallinternists.com).

RELATED ARTICLE

Single-Payer National Health Insurance: Physicians' Views
Danny McCormick, David U. Himmelstein, Steffie Woolhandler, and David H. Bor
Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(3):300-304.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT