English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The word “altruism” is commonly ascribed to those who pursue a career in healthcare. However, looking at medicine through the lens of altruism shuts our eyes to the inherent humanity of physicians and limits our ability to provide optimal care. It is unreasonable to expect that physicians will (whether consciously or unconsciously) always prioritize ideal health outcomes in the face of varying incentives. This is especially true given that there is no single universally accepted definition of what “ideal health outcomes” would be. Unsurprisingly, a recent Cochrane review of the subject found that physician compensation models do in fact influence behavior.1 How then can we align physician incentives with quality care? There are four discrete compensation structures in use, with a blend of these commonly employed. Fee-for-service (FFS) models compensate doctors a set amount for each service they perform. Capitation models offer compensation based on the total number of patients under a doctor’s care, regardless of how frequently each patient seeks care. Salary models offer physicians fixed remuneration that does not vary based on the services they perform nor patient demographics and are commonly employed by hospitals and community health centers. Pay for performance (P4P) models provide direct financial incentives for meeting certain specific treatment goals.2,3 In Canada, 40% of physicians primarily receive FFS payments (>90% of their income), 10% primarily receive salaried payments, and 1% primarily receive capitation compensation. 33% of physicians receive a blend and about 16% receive the majority of their compensation through other forms, including P4P/incentives, short term contracts, and per diems.4

Physician compensation structures and how they incentivize specific patient care behaviour