News Release
Complex and Rapidly Changing Payment Models Challenge Physician Practices
Oct 24, 2018
Follow-Up Study
Format | File Size | Notes |
---|---|---|
PDF file | 0.1 MB | Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience. |
The American Medical Association asked RAND Corporation researchers to examine how alternative payment models (APMs) — payment models other than fee for service — have affected physician practices. Researchers interviewed and surveyed physicians and other staff in 31 practices in six markets, including a variety of practice sizes, specialties, and ownership models. The work was a follow-up to a 2014 study that also examined APMs' effects on physician practices.
Researchers found that these results have persisted since 2014:
Researchers also identified new findings regarding APMs:
Taken together, these findings suggest that physician practice engagement with APMs would be enhanced by simpler APMs (to help practices focus on improving patient care); a more stable, predictable, and gradual pace of change; greater support for new capabilities and timely data; and reexamination of how practices might respond to APMs that involve downside financial risk.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Research brief series. RAND research briefs present policy-oriented summaries of individual published, peer-reviewed documents or of a body of published work.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
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.