Has capitation reached its high-water mark?
Low payment rates and a public backlash seem to
be slowing its progress. But dont count on prepaid care to go away anytime
soon.
By Ken Terry
Managed Care Editor
When hundreds of San Diego physicians rallied last fall to protest what they
viewed as inadequate funding of health care, part of their ire was directed
at low capitation payments. "Capitation rates are insufficient to cover
the cost of care and are driving physicians out of business," declared
the San Diego County Medical Society in a press release.
But family physician James T. Hay, president of the county society, wasnt
one of those protesters. Last July, after a five-year decline in payment rates,
he and the five other doctors in his primary care group received a 10 percent
raise in capitation payments from their IPA, which supplies 65 percent of the
groups revenues. Capitation now brings the group more revenue, on a per-service
basis, than do discounted fee-for-service payments, which are running at about
90 percent of Medicares fee schedule. Nevertheless, the group stopped
taking new HMO patients last month and is actively seeking more PPO business.
Hay cites fears of HMO insolvencies and the doctors dislike of their gatekeeper
role (see below, Why capitation isn't working for this practice).
Meanwhile, across the country in Buffalo, internist John Notaro praises his
capitated arrangement with Independent Health, a local HMO that provides nearly
40 percent of his patients. Including the return of his withhold and a quality
bonus from Independent Health, he too figures hes making more on his capitated
practice than on his fee-for-service business. (See the story below on how Notaro is benefiting from capitation.)
But in Richmond, VA, internist John M. Daniel III has watched his capitation
rates lose ground to inflation. Cigna is still paying the same amount it did
in 1997, he says, and Aetnas rate is frozen at its 1993 level.
Daniel himself is actually doing a bit better under capitation than under fee-for-service.
But he doesnt think this is true of many of the 70 other doctors in the
group practice without walls that he belongs to. Thats because most of
his colleagues dont know how to handle capitation. "They didnt
change their way of practicing and become more efficient," he says.
The very different attitudes toward capitation in San Diego, Buffalo, and Richmond
reflect deep divisions among physicians of different backgrounds who face diverse
market conditions. What the three doctors share is that theyre all located
in areas that have a significant amount of capitation. But in other places,
prepaid care seems to be fading or never achieved much of a foothold.
Has capitation reached its high-water mark? If its receding, will you
eventually be paid wholly on a fee-for-service or salaried basis? If not, will
you always be caught between the rock of self-preservation and the hard place
of satisfying patient demands? No one has all the answers, but to find out what
experts think, read on.
Capitations future is still up in the air
Several surveys have shown either an increase in the volume of capitated business
or in the number of physicians paid under this system. Medical Economics 1999 Continuing Survey, for example, indicated that 44 percent of office-based
physicians received capitation payments in 1998, compared with 40 percent in
1996, and that the share of gross income these doctors derived from capitation
had jumped from 15 to 20 percent.*
More recently, a survey by National Health Information, a publisher of capitation-related
newsletters, found that 75 percent of responding primary care groups reported
they were either seeking more capitation or keeping their current level of risk
contracts. Similarly, Evergreen Re, a big reinsurance company, found that 74
percent of physician groups in markets with HMO penetration above 30 percent
accepted capitation in 1999, vs 65 percent the year before.
InterStudy, a St. Paul, MN-based research firm that tracks HMOs, reports that
from 1998 to 1999, the number of HMO patients in capitated plans jumped from
37.5 million to 43.2 million.
The most revealing figures, which come from the Medical Group Management Association,
tell a different story. Between 1998 and 1999, the MGMA reports, the median
percentage of practice gross from capitation in multispecialty groups dropped from 16 to 11 percent. Since the number of prepaid groups held steady during
that time, this represents a significant decline.
The MGMAs numbers comport with the view of some observers, who see capitation
retreating rapidly as a result of both economic factors and the public backlash
against managed care. "Im seeing capitation go down all around the
country," says Greg Korneluk, chairman of the International Council for
Quality Care, a Boca Raton, FL, firm that specializes in practice re-engineering.
In West Palm Beach, for instance, a primary care group that was 30 percent capitated
until a year ago is now only 10 percent prepaid, he says. Four internists who
practice together in Brooklyn, NY, he adds, used to have an entirely capitated
practice. Now theyre 100 percent fee-for-service, partly because they
couldnt cope with reduced capitation payments.
Of course, discounted fee-for-service payments have steadily decreased, too.
But Korneluk notes that when doctors no longer make more from capitation than
from fee-for-service, taking on risk doesnt make sense.
Atlanta-based consultant Gary Matthews states that capitation is fading in
his area and across the South. Matthews, of Physicians Health Care Advisors,
cites the drop-off in capitation in cities like Baton Rouge and Washington,
DC. But he admits that in other markets like Miami, Richmond, and Buffalo, capitation
is still holding its own.
Phil Beard, a practice management consultant and CEO of Overland Park, KS-based
ProStat Resource Group, believes that primary care capitation has leveled off
or is declining nationally. While hes seeing some growth in specialty
carveout networks, the only geographical areas where prepaid care is spreading
are those where its already established, he observes. "In markets
where capitation never really grabbed hold, its probably not coming in
right now. The concept has just fallen into too much disfavor."
Consultant Peter Kongstvedt of Ernst & Young views primary care capitation
as fairly stable. But contracts that put primary care physicians at risk for
specialty referrals, inpatient care, ancillary services, or drugs are becoming
much less common, he says. He attributes that partly to the failures of many
practice management companies and IPAs, especially in California. Beard adds
that the decline in global and other risk contracts can also be traced to the
decreased viability of PHOs and integrated delivery systems that formerly accepted
full-risk capitation.
Plans have mixed feelings about prepaid care
Some industry experts maintain that its the payers, not the physicians,
who are backing away from prepaid care. "Im sure the plans are pulling
back," says Matthews. "The profits in being able to manage risk,
and so the plans, rather than abdicating risk, are trying to manage it."
The reason they didnt do this years ago is that there was enough of a
gap between premiums and capitation payments to allow the plans to turn a nice
profit while passing on the risk to providers. When that gap narrowed and HMOs
started losing money, the idea of taking risk for care and profiting from direct
cost savings became more attractive.
Kongstvedt offers a different explanation: Managed care companies are responding
to public opinion, which has turned against capitated HMOs. If not for that,
he says, theyd still prefer capitation, because it costs less administratively,
and they believe it gives physicians incentives to manage care better.
Beard agrees that the environment has changed. Texas lawsuit against
Aetna and two other plans over inducements to withhold care,** he says, signals that consumers regard capitation "as a system that pays
doctors not to take care of them. Thats a hard climate in which to push
capitation."
Under Aetnas settlement with Texas, the plan agreed to stop paying incentives
to doctors who keep costs within a budget and not to penalize physicians who
exceed that budget. Aetna has since applied similar principles to its contracts
in Virginia and Georgia, and its planning to do the same in the Midwest.
It has also stopped capitating doctors in Connecticut. According to Aetna spokeswoman
Wendy Morphew, the big insurer is loosening its controls to satisfy physicians,
who have criticized Aetnas strong-arm tactics from coast to coast. "We
used to believe our approach was best," she says. "But many physicians
didnt, and we cant ignore them."
Other plans have decreased their involvement in prepaid care. Last year, Cigna
eliminated primary care capitation (but not global risk contracts) in Colorado.
And PacifiCare recently increased the portion of risk it assumes in its contracts
with capitated practices.
"Capitation has become increasingly problematic for many hospitals and
medical groups," said PacifiCares VP and corporate medical director,
FP Sam Ho. Ho blamed the problems with prepaid care on the escalating costs
of care, the poor financial management by some IPAs and medical groups, and
plunging premiums during the mid-to-late 90s that forced health plans
to cut their payments to providers.
Market struggles dictate changes in capitation structure
Internist Andrew P. Siskind, medical director and president of the Bristol
Park Medical Group, a 100-doctor primary care group in Orange, CA, says his
group wont back away from capitation. "We believe its the best
way to provide medical care," he says. "Its the only system
where the healthier you keep your patient, the more money you make."
The problem with the system, says Siskind, is that "its been underfunded
for so long. Unfortunately, thats going to break up capitation as we know
it. There will continue to be managed care and some form of capitation, but
there has to be a new business model."
As part of a large integrated delivery system, Bristol Park has set up its
own version of this new model. The group and its affiliated hospitalswhich
contract together through a foundationdidnt renew contracts with
12 of the 17 HMOs they dealt with and negotiated radically different agreements
with the others. While the health system didnt get a major increase in
rates from the remaining plans, it persuaded them all to take back a significant
share of risk and to sign a uniform contract.
"Now well have just one contract type with the five payers,"
notes Siskind. "Weve gotten rid of all pharmacy risk, including injectables
and immunizations. And weve gone to a shared risk pool on outside provider
costs and hospitalization." The result, he hopes, will be markedly higher
reimbursement for the group, because it will no longer be solely at risk for
costs it cant control.
Siskind isnt worried about eliminating contracts that brought in 25 percent
of the groups revenues, because all those contracts were unprofitable.
The 2 to 3 percent increases the plans offered the group, he says, were inadequate
to cover the increased cost of care. And they were far less than the 10 to 15
percent hikes that the insurers pried out of local employers.
"Babes in the woods" play at capitation
In contrast with Bristol Parks physicians, who are trained from residency
to be efficient, Siskind views the East Coast doctors hes met as "babes
in the woods when it comes to capitation." Inpatient costs, in particular,
are still bloated in the eastern half of the country, he believes. If physicians
knew how to control them, large groups could do quite well with global capitation,
he says. But groups dont have a clue about how to handle capitation risk.
The situation he describes matches the experience of Richmond internist John
Daniel. His 70-doctor group without walls is still taking only primary care
capitation, which the plans pay directly to individual doctors. One reason the
group hasnt pursued more risk is that it has a fairly primitive information
system. Only within the past year has the organization even gained the capability
to track its capitation payments against fee-for-service equivalents to measure
how its doing on each of its prepaid contracts.
Some of the groups doctors have made counterproductive changes in the
capitated portion of their practices, says Daniel. For instance, many are unaware
that plans will pay them fees for services not covered in their capitation contracts.
So if mole removal isnt a service covered under the cap, theyll
refer patients to dermatologists instead of removing the moles themselves, as
they would for fee-for-service patients.
Daniel himself has learned how to cope with capitation, he says. If the prepaid
portion of his business increased, "I wouldnt be glad, but Id
tolerate it. I dont think Im losing anything by it, but its
not the way I learned to practice medicine. All of us learned to work on a piecework
basis. I dont think its superiorits a habit. Its
just what people are used to. You feel youre getting a little bit more
when you work more."
Will physicians ever embrace capitation wholeheartedly outside of areas like
Orange County, CA, where it has become the norm? Consultant Phil Beard thinks
not. "We had the best chance for physicians to accept capitation over the
past five to eight years, when there was this flurry of activity and every physician
had heard about it and thought it was coming." Now that prepaid care has
stalled, he says, fee-for-service doctors have less reason to try it.
Capitation failed to dominate health care because "doctors never went
along with the concept that they had to change how they practice medicine and
manage costs," says Beard. "They never set up an infrastructure in
their practice or did anything different under capitation. It was expensive
to do, and it went against their basic theory of I treat all patients
the same. The bottom line is that you cant treat capitated patients
the same as fee-for-service patients. You really have to look at them differently."
*See "Capitation
on the rise," Dec. 6, 1999.
**See "What
the Texas-Aetna agreement really means," Sept. 4, 2000.
A Medical Economics Web Exclusive
Why capitation isnt working for this practice
Family physician James Hay of San Diego is seeing more HMO patients than
ever before, and hes making more on them than he is on his fee-for-service
patients. Yet he and his five colleagues in the North Coast Family Medical
Group recently decided not to accept any more HMO patients and to build their
PPO business instead.
The biggest factor in their decision is their fear of whats in store
for HMOs, which have been plagued by the failures of practice management companies
and provider groups in southern California. "PacifiCare is in trouble,
and thats a big chunk of our business," explains Hay. "If
we allow that plan to continue to grow, and all of a sudden PacifiCare goes
away, well be harmed worse than if we just take a little bit less in
capitation payments right now.
"The other thing is that none of us is happy being a gatekeeper. We
actually hate the idea, and wish that whole system would go away. Even though
the per-patient revenue is greater, the per-patient work flow is also greater,
because theres more paperwork, more phone involvement, and more staff
time necessary to take care of an HMO patient."
The hassle factor aside, Hay and his partners dislike being the intermediaries
between the plans and their patients. "I dont think any of us has
had difficulty making the correct ethical decisions. Its just the bind
were placed in when were confronted by patients who want things
they may or may not need. Were the barrier between them and the service
they want. Were very comfortable discussing what services they think
they need; but when it comes down to being the ones who choose or dont
choose to fill out the authorization request, were pretty uncomfortable
with that."
Two-thirds of North Coasts revenue comes in the form of capitation
payments from an IPA that takes full risk from HMOs, contracts with physicians,
and manages their utilization of services. This delegation of health-plan
functions to IPAs hasnt worked well, says Hay. He explains that thats
because, until this year, capitation payments in California had declined for
a decade. Most risk-taking groups and IPAs barely have sufficient funds to
stay in business and pay their doctors a living wage. So they havent
been able to buy the advanced information systems needed to do the kind of
medical management that would both improve care and enable the groups to stay
within their budgets.
Hay fears that the situation will deteriorate further. "When the levels
of payment get low enough and many groups are going bankrupt, doctors will have
to decide whether to restrict services or go out of business. Thats not
defensible. If I dont have enough money to provide the care, and I have
to choose between my business staying open and providing what some people want,
thats a choice I dont know how to make."
A Medical Economics Web Exclusive
Capitation can be successful if its done right
Internist John Notaro of Buffalo, is excited about his groups "virtual
lipid clinic." In this homegrown program, the 100-doctor Buffalo Medical
Group identifies HMO patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease and
tries to make sure they receive cholesterol-lowering treatments. Such a program
would be unthinkable, says Notaro, if the groups revenues came mainly
from fee-for-service insurance. But under capitation, he says, its feasible
and sensible to shift resources to the patients who need them most.
One local HMO, Independent Health, supplies most of Notaros prepaid
business, which accounts for 40 percent of his volume. While it pays his group
only $8 to $9 per member per month in primary care capitation, Notaro and
the 30 other primary care doctors in the group got their 15 percent withhold
back this year. The return of that withhold, for which all of the primaries
shared risk, was contingent on them staying within their budgets for pharmacy,
labs, ER use, and specialty referrals. In addition, Notaro received a care-management
bonus for good patient satisfaction and access. Overall, he finds that he
makes more from capitation than from fee-for-service.
Capitation has also aided Notaros efforts to re-engineer his office
processes. For instance, as a result of going to open-access scheduling, where
patients can get appointments on the same day they call, he has been able
to increase his panel size by 30 percent. He couldnt have done it, he
says, without doing more nonvisit care. That wouldnt have been reimbursed
under fee-for-service, but capitation rewards doctors for keeping patients
healthy. Instead of churning patients, as some fee-for-service doctors do,
he tries to do as much as he can in each visit, reducing the need for follow-ups.
Equally important, Notaro feels he can do more for prepaid chronic-disease
patients and others who need extra care. Nurses in the virtual lipid clinic,
for example, call up high-risk patients, telling them how to control their
cholesterol and asking them to come in only if necessary.
"The program doesnt depend on one-to-one office visits,"
Notaro points out. "In the old fee-for-service system, theres no
way to pay for that. Because in that system, the only thing that gets reimbursed
is the office visit, even if that isnt the optimal mode of interaction.
We get suboptimal results with chronic-disease patients in systems that depend
on one-to-one visits. But outside of capitation, you couldnt pay for
something like our virtual lipid clinic."
In the population health approach, Notaro sees a counterbalance to the natural
tendency of doctors to undertreat capitated patients. He cites the prescribing
of lipid-lowering statin drugs, which he studied by pulling charts at random.
"We have to build systems so that high-risk people get the medication,
and not the low-risk people, for whom the risk of the drug outweighs the benefit.
Thats also a poor use of resources. We want to build systems, even in
capitation, that guarantee quality by targeting high-risk patients. With those
kinds of guarantees, capitation can be successful."
Ken Terry. Has capitation reached its high-water mark?. Medical Economics 2001;4:32.