The Effect of Capitation on Switching Primary Care Physicians

Published in: Health Services Research, v. 38, no. 1, pt. 1, Feb. 2003, p. 191-209

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2003

by Melony E. Sorbero, Andrew W. Dick, Jack Zwanziger, Dana B. Mukamel, Nancy Weyl

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.blackwell-synergy.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between patient case-mix, utilization, primary care physician (PCP) payment method, and the probability that patients switch their PCPs. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Administrative enrollment and claims/encounter data for 1994-1995 from four physician organizations. STUDY DESIGN: The authors developed a conceptual model of patient switching behavior, which they used to guide the specification of multivariate logistic analyses focusing on interactions between patient case-mix, utilization, and PCP reimbursement methods. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Claims data were aggregated to the encounter level; a switch was defined as a change in PCP since the previous encounter. The PCPs were reimbursed on either a capitated or fee-for-service (FFS) basis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patients with stable chronic conditions (Ambulatory Diagnostic Groups [ADG] 10) and capitated PCPs were 36 percentmore likely to switch PCPs than similar patients with FFS PCPs, controlling for patient age and sex and physician fixed effects. When the number of previous encounters was included in the model, this relationship was no longer significant. Instead high utilizers with capitated PCPs were significantly more likely to switch PCPs than were similar patients with FFS PCPs. CONCLUSIONS: A patient's demographics and utilization are associated with the probability that the patient will switch PCPs. Capitated PCP payment was associated with higher rates of switching among high utilizers of health care resources. These findings raise concerns about the continuity and quality of care experienced by vulnerable patients in an era of changing financial incentives.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.