How money changes a doctor's thinking
Two doctors leave a hospital budget meeting devoted to productivity and "relative value units," or measures of physician time and effort cranked into financial formulas that determine how they are paid.
In the hallway they come upon a younger colleague looking for advice on a patient. Do they take the time to share their expertise, eager to help the unknown patient? Or do they begrudge the junior physician the uncompensated time it would take to help?
Something like that happened to Dr. Pamela Hartzband and Dr. Jerome Groopman of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, who write about money and the changing culture of medicine in this week's New England Journal of Medicine. They stopped to give a quick consultation, but the meeting's relative value units, commonly called RVUs, were echoing in their heads, Hartzband said in an interview.
" 'Why am I even thinking this way?' " she said she asked herself. "That kind of thing hasn't really happened before."
Behavioral economics has an answer, according to research the doctors happened to be reading. People responded differently in experiments in which some of them were asked to perform tasks for money -- "market" interactions -- and others were asked just to help someone in need -- "communal" interactions.
Once money enters the conversation, selfishness comes along with it, the theory goes. Hartzband and Groopman ask if an increased emphasis on cost controls in healthcare will not only hamper cooperation between colleagues but also discourage caring for the patient beyond minimal guidelines.
"We believe that in the current environment, the balance has tipped toward market exchanges at the expense of medicine's communal or social dimension," they write.
Concierge practices, in which doctors charge patients yearly premiums in exchange for more intense attention, is one effect of heightened pressures to be productive, the authors say. Doctors bail out of practices in which they see one patient very 15 minutes.
"Ideally every patient wants to be treated like a concierge patient and every doctor wants to practice in an environment where ... you have the time that you need to extend yourself to patients and their families in whatever way they need without worrying how it impacts productivity," Hartzband said in the interview.
She and Groopman propose extending the "medical home" model, through which a primary care physician coordinates care with an emphasis on preventive medicine. A set fee per patient would compensate physicians, rather than payments based on RVUs, to recognize what is now unreimbursed time.
"There are a lot of discussions about a major overhaul of the healthcare system and a lot of it is revolving around the subject of money and cost awareness," Hartzband said. "In all this we want to be sure that you're not losing some of the really most essential elements of medical care, which is hard to put a dollar value on."



No one goes to a doctor for "health care" we go for health crisis intervention.
My father had this system in his own general practice in Minnesota in the late 1930s and 1040s. He charged his "annual patients" $45 per year, a fee which covered their care with him. He practiced preventive medicine and personally met with groups of his patients at our house on weekends to explain how the different physiological systems worked. He made house calls and saw these patients in his office when needed. He told them he was practicing "Chinese medicine", ie., paying the doctor when well and not paying for care when sick. This was financial incentive for him to encourage prevention. The patients loved it--and him..
Ms. Cooney:
Please re-read the article, and report on its scientific merit without trying to make it into a drama. "Something like that" did NOT happen to the authors; they did not encounter physicians struggling with the dilemma of whether to help a colleague or not. The authors saw two doctors talking and thought, "what if . . ."
Also, doctors do not "bail out of practices in which they see patients very (sic) 15 minutes." It is hard work, but we all do that on a regular basis (every 10 minutes for orthopods). We signed up for hard work when we went to medical school, and almost all us make do. (And please don't buy into the idea that we are stuck in it and can't get out because we have to pay off our student loans. Not only are we, in general, bright enough people to succeed in professions outside of medicine, as many have done, but the vast majority of us don't get out because we get more than a monetary reward for our work: We get to help people in need, a value that is truly at the core of all physicians).
We get enough of this misplaced drama from prime time TV. Stick to the facts; we will still find it interesting.
Somebody should clue these bean-counter admins in: Sacrificing quality for volume isn't even considered "productivity" in the industrial world. One of these days, a lowly HMO patient is going to turn out to have a rich relative, and it's going to end up costing them right back, in a currency that even they can comprehend.
What a ridiculous argument their editorial makes. Using data from social science studies unrelated to the medical environment (social science is not real science by-the-way). Since when is moving a couch at all related to asking a colleague for medical advice. Pure bunk, especially at an academic center where discussing cases are normal and mandatory. Why would you even give this junk any press? Just because it is the guru Groopman published in the NEJM? In the real world, doctors help each other, and if they don't, they end up ostracized. It has nothing to do with money.
I go for health care. No crisis here
Elizabeth Cooney : "Once money enters the conversation, selfishness comes along with it, the theory goes."
MD's want 2 get paid. It's a job. Do u want 2 work for free? U make MD's look ugly and greedy. Why don't u write a piece how MD's work long hrs, work weekends, get paged all hrs of the night, do research and get published. How it works out 2 b for some MD's $13 per hr. Wait....u can write about the 20yr long road 2 become an MD?
Capitalism is killing our society on so many levels. Doctors should be ashamed of themselves for not protecting their profession. Health care has been infiltrated by business tycoons whose primary interest is in the profitability of medicine and not the care. Shame on everyone responsible for this grave path medicine has taken and God help America.
Since no one has a health care plan, here's mine: First, every health care professional (every doctor, nurse, specialist, unit secretary, etc) becomes a Federal government employee subject to the government pay schedule. Next, a 10% National Health Tax is imposed on EVERY item we buy including all food and other necessities. Everyone pays this tax. Everyone. Health insurers will cease to exist. The government takes over all of it and pays on a set salary pay scale. No more health insurance premiums, co-pays, deductibles, confusing fees and charges. Hospitals and nursing homes will no longer be private and the system ceases to be about profit and begins to be about wellness.
I have witnessed physician greed for a long time. No one wants to call it that. Physician incomes are extremely high and dedication is at an all time low. Being "on call" on weekends now means nothing more than telling your patients to go to the ER.
The problem isn't capitalism. It isn't the heatlhcare system. It's a belief that every doctor has to drive a new Mercedes and live behind the gates.
Physicians practice for MONEY! The average physician makes 3 to 6 times there collegues in other countries, yet we have worse outcomes. PS is right on the money but his plan won't work because the same lobby who protect impaired physicians and control the billing codes (the AMA) won't be happy until every American forks over most of their income (middle class is between $25,000 and $90,000 per household, the average physician makes $160,000) to these professional who apparently forgot why they became physicians in the first place!
to PS, My husband and I used to live in Canada. We were lucky to have caring doctors, and they would let us come back for the small fee the government paid them for each service. We did that for a while while living on the border later. The income taxes were confiscatory, they were not in it for the money though, but were independent health care people, not employees of the government. However, I did wonder why our US citizens paid for the exhorbitant drugs here while the Canadians had access to much cheaper identical drugs Why don't we have the same plan our genious members of congress have for all, trhen we would see some improvement here..
If you want a drug prescription or surgery go see a doctor. If you want healthcare go see a nurse.
PS,
I had government healhcare for five years while in the US Navy -- believe me, you don't want government healthcare! People are people -- in the private sector and in government -- not saints. The closer we get the decision making to physicians and their patients -- with no middle men in between -- the better.
-cc.
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
Contributors
blogger
Boston Globe Health and Science staff:
browse this blog
by categoryrelated links
INside Boston.com