Doctors wary of looming Medicare cut, or a short-term fix

November 30, 2011

By Arielle Levin Becker

John Foley has wanted to be a doctor since he was 6, and the Norwich cardiologist still considers the chance to take care of patients "the coolest thing on the planet."

But increasingly, Foley has found himself questioning the future of the field. Despite working longer days, his income is down 45 percent from 4½ years ago, and he's seen fellow doctors give up independent practice to work for hospitals.

"It's heartbreaking," he said. "I never envisioned, never dreamed in my life I'd be at 49 years of age sitting here talking to a reporter about whether medicine could be sustained."

The latest concern on Foley's mind is a more-than-27 percent cut to the fees Medicare pays physicians that's poised to take effect Jan. 1, the result of a formula developed in 1997 to limit growth in Medicare spending. In Connecticut, the cut would be somewhat higher, close to 30 percent.

Congress is expected to act to avert the cut, as it has every previous time a formula-driven cut has loomed since 2003.

But doctors and other Medicare experts say the uncertainty that comes with each round of potential cuts is taking a toll, making it harder for them to make investments in their practices or feel confident taking new Medicare patients at a time when the program's rolls are expected to boom.

The cuts would also apply to TRICARE, which covers members of the military and their families.

Last year, Congress passed six temporary fixes to put off looming cuts. The final one produced a one-year reprieve -- giving time, some hoped, to address the underlying formula. More recently, doctors' groups had hoped the congressional "super committee" would tackle the formula, known as the sustainable growth rate, or SGR. But when the group failed to reach an agreement, doctors found themselves in a familiar place, waiting for Congress to act.

"It's an open sore," Dr. Michael Krinsky, a neurologist and president of the Connecticut State Medical Society, said shortly after the super committee announced its lack of agreement. "People in medicine are absolutely crestfallen now because we know that it's going to be very difficult to take care of the same folks that we've been taking care of in the same way."

For Medicare patients, the continued uncertainty about rates can mean more difficulty finding a doctor to treat them, said Judith Stein, executive director of the Mansfield-based Center for Medicare Advocacy.

"I'm hearing of physicians who are no longer taking Medicare beneficiaries," she said. "And when there are more and more of us coming into the system, that's a big problem."

Last year, as a 23 percent cut loomed, 55 percent of doctors responding to a survey by the Connecticut State Medical Society said they would limit the number of Medicare patients they accept or stop participating in the program if Congress delayed the cut but did not enact a permanent solution. The medical society is now conducting a similar survey.

The lack of a lasting Medicare fix can also mean disadvantages for patients if it keeps their doctors from making investments that could improve their practices, Stein said.

"Are you going to get involved with the new electronic medical records? Are you going to order that equipment for the coming year that would help you do things more effectively and efficiently?" she asked. "Well, what if you don't know what's coming in?"

That's the problem Foley's practice is facing. He and his colleagues were considering upgrading their computer system to help meet federal standards for electronic medical records. The federal government will provide incentive payments to help cover the costs. But in the current environment, Foley is not confident the federal money will be there. The practice has also seen an erosion of its income from decreased Medicare reimbursement for imaging procedures, which it had used to help cover shortfalls in Medicare payments for patient visits.

So the computer upgrades aren't happening just yet. "We can't afford that, so we put it off," said Foley, the medical society's president-elect.

More than 60 percent of Foley's patients are covered by Medicare, and he particularly loves treating older patients and hearing about their lives. A 27 percent cut to Medicare would cause the practice to close, he said. He thinks another short-term fix is more likely, but that could come with a smaller cut to specialists, which he said could also make it harder for physicians to take Medicare patients.

Even when Congress passes a fix to avert a cut, Medicare payments can be delayed, causing cash flow problems for some practices, said Dr. Robert McLean, a New Haven internist and rheumatologist who serves as governor of the American College of Physicians' Connecticut Chapter.

"So how can you make financial plans for the end of this year, the beginning of next year for even doing practice infrastructure investment? You can't," he said. "The cash flow is too dubious and uncertain."

The short-term fixes have become perceived as a yearly game, McLean said. "It doesn't help the government's efforts to try and get the physician community to buy into the government's ability to help run the health care system well," he said.

As for the odds of Congress acting before the end of the year to avert the cut?

"They're going to do something," McLean said. "The question is, are they going to do enough?"

Several medical groups are now rooting for a bill being introduced by Rep. Allyson Y. Schwartz, D-Penn., that would repeal the SGR formula as well as make several other changes to Medicare, including increasing payments to primary care doctors, testing new payment and health care delivery models, and encouraging physicians to change the way they deliver care by reducing payments to providers who don't adopt models that will contain costs and improve quality.

Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd District, a co-sponsor of the bill, said when he got to Congress five years ago, doctors lobbied for one-year fixes. "The fact is that people's patience for that is really wearing thin," he said.

Either way, he said, "The conventional wisdom is still that the 27 percent cut is not going to happen."

By law, Congress can avert the Medicare cut without finding offsetting cuts, but Courtney acknowledged that politically, people will look for corresponding cuts. That prospect has other health care groups worried.

Please login or register to post comments

Not a member of The Connecticut Mirror yet?

Be a part of The Connecticut Mirror community, comment on stories, receive e-mail news updates and more!

Comments

This story is really

This story is really disturbing! The doctor actually said "the practice has seen an erosion of its income from decreased reimbursement for imaging procedures, which it had used to help cover shortfalls in Medicare payments for patient visits". This is SHOCKING! How many unnecessary imaging procedures did they do to make up for a $ shortfalls? This is just like churning in the investment business. DISGUSTING! Brokers get barred for such practices. Doctors should also. By the way, how much income does this POOR doctor make? It must be very little.
Reporter....please ask the doctor these follow up questions and

Read More

Actually, this doctor's

Actually, this doctor's problems are GENUINE and becoming so for more and more doctors, especially non-specialists. They're even WORSE for mental health practitioners.

But the problem is not confined to Medicare payments. Medicaid is the absolute PITS. And the downward pressure on service payment rates being exerted by health insurance networks continues to increase, beginning to rival that of Medicare and Medicaid.

Remember - in addition to covering the cost to just operate their practices, doctors HAVE to recoup the cost of their outrageously expensive medical education and ongoing re-education. It's all INCREDIBLY expensive. Which is why more and more

Read More

Medicare rates are already so

Medicare rates are already so low that I wasn't able to find a different doctor to see my elderly mother. We had some concerns about her treatment and wanted to try a different doctor, but that turned out not to be possible. That was a year ago, so even before this year's round of cuts, Medicare reimbursements were low enough to affect the availability of care. It will get worse if there are more cuts.

However, in our current system of medical care, doctors run their practices as a business. They have to cover

Read More

I ask again...what does this

I ask again...what does this doctor make in personal income? What do others in his practice make? Does he really want us to feel sorry for him? He is spending more time at work...ahh too bad...we are ALL spending much more time at work to just maintain our incomes and hopefully our jobs. Welcome to the real world of working people Doc.
Let's be real...much of the healthcare problem is about greed and the fact that doctors for the last thirty years or so, have been increasingly interested in their incomes rather than their patients. They now think they have

Read More

I enjoyed reading your

I enjoyed reading your comments. Thanks.
My view is that providing medical care to patients was never intended to be, nor should it be, all about "business" and "profits". That is a very recent phenomenon which has gotten totally out of whack over the last thirty years. Once personal financial gain becomes the priority, patient care is totally compromised. Being a doctor is a "helping profession" guided by a clear and simple OATH. Maximizing financial gain and personal wealth should not be a consideration for medical professionals! It is a direct conflict of interests. Patient care should not be a

Read More

None of the comments posted

None of the comments posted here so far seems the slightest bit aware of the real problem. The problem is the interference of government in the practice of medicine at all. The problem is when we naively believe we can get something for nothing. Bratney evidently believes that doctors, nurses, biologists, biochemists, technicians, etc. -- anybody involved in the medical field -- should learn their skills at considerable cost and over years of persistent effort and then work for nothing or for whatever bratney thinks they should make to avoid being called greedy. It never

Read More

Doctors provide a service.

Doctors provide a service. Just ask a heart attack or cancer survivor. They have a right to earn a living free from government control and we have a right make our own choices in medical care.

Bratney, perhaps you should meditate on a country without competent medical providers before you decide they have no right to earn a living. You might also want to reflect on who is going to be willing to go thru 6-8 yrs of school (requiring loan repayment), work horrendously long hours (away from family), and run a business (a medical practice is

Read More

Please read my comments

Please read my comments carefully. I did not say " work for nothing" ...I said get the financial interests and incomes of doctors back in balance with patient interests. We all know the difference between greed and reasonable incomes.
By the way if you take the current "unchecked market driven" healthcare system forward for 20 years...no one will be able to afford healthcare....except mega wealthy doctors. In fact how are you feeling about your current medical care? Our costs have gone up 300% over the last 10 years and the quality of care has certainly not improved. Something has to

Read More

I will resist the temptation

I will resist the temptation to disparage your intelligence and assume that you are a smart person. I did not say "no right to earn a living". I did say we have to refind the balance between doctors incomes and patient care. Excess provider costs if left unchecked will destroy our healthcare system....in fact we are already very close to this. There are real alternatives between unchecked incomes for doctors and other healthcare businesses and a govt system of care. Take a look at the Mayo Clinic model for a high quality patient oriented system of care. It really works.

Word it anyway you want, but

Word it anyway you want, but your intent is still to expect Uncle Sam to control who earns what and how.

You can also hint at intelligence all you want, but talking to an actual doctor who is already having to lay off staff and is seeing less talent coming into the field would serve you well. Dr. Foley is not the only physician concerned with the fact we will be faced with a serious shortage of providers sooner than later. He just happens to be one of the few brave enough to ditch the political correctness.

Why are some

Read More

So, Bratney, please enlighten

So, Bratney, please enlighten us; what is an appropriate income for a physician? Should government set income guidelines for physicians and other professionals? If so, why?

Did you really say

Did you really say this..."the problem with healthcare is THE INTERFERENCE OF GOVT". You must be kidding. Exactly how has the govt interfered with healthcare?
The problem is insurers who raise premiums ridiculously every year and are all about max profit and screwing the patient, big pharma and med equip companies who have been soaking all of us by charging ridiculous amounts for anything labeled medical (see my example about cost of MRI machines in Japan compared to USA)...how much are you paying for prescriptions?, and hospitals who are all about max income min patient care, and doctors who have

Read More

We have had tons of "free

We have had tons of "free market competition" in the healthcare industry for decades...how is that working out for customers, patients, businesses providing insurance for employees?? This has been a runaway train of free market "competition". In fact it is a flawed competition model because prices only go one way...UP...ALOT!

Doctors take an oath and that

Doctors take an oath and that should guide EVERTHING they do....personal financial interests are not part of the oath and should never conflict with patient interests or influence a doctors actions.
What is all your talk about "govt setting income levels"? That is not the point. Just take a look at the Mayo Clinic model of care and staffing. Physicians are paid a salary, get raises like anyone else, and are eligible for bonuses based on "THE QUALITY, RESULTS, AND EFFECTIVENESS OF CARE PROVIDED"...IT IS NOT ABOUT NUMBERS OF PROCEDURES or any other financial consideration. ( or imaging income as

Read More

Regarding the comments of

Regarding the comments of bratney to this article. Let us take total knee replacement as an example and an orthopaedic surgeon that specializes in this operation. The population that needs it is increasing and is predominantly of a medicare age. Medicare has been actually reducing the fee for this operation for the last 15 years and the new cuts, if they occur would reduce the reimbursement for a total knee replacement to about $1000, the cost of a fancy flat screen tv set. However, the surgeon specialist who has a very large percentage of patients of medicare

Read More

The doctor actually said "the

The doctor actually said "the practice has seen an erosion of its income from decreased reimbursement for imaging procedures, which it had used to help cover shortfalls in Medicare payments for patient visits".

Please notice, Bratney that this did not say "additional or unnecesary imaging procedures were ordered to cover shortfalls". This is how it appears that you have interpreted it. It is simply stating that the reimbursement from appropriately ordered imaging procedures has been one way that they have kept the practice profitable.

It would be interesting to hear your story. Your view of physicians

Read More

Thanks for the thoughtful

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Doctors do have long education committments with large costs. They have every right to be compensated in a way that recognizes this sacrifice. They do choose the profession knowing the sacrifice that wil be required. I totally agree with your point "fair renumeration"....fair for all, keeping the Hippocartic oath at the heart of any medical care decision.
By the way, other professions that you mentioned are being criticized strongly for their income levels which are just out of whack and way beyond what anyone would say is reasonable or fair. The legal profession is going

Read More

My view of doctors is

My view of doctors is varied...many are dedicated caring professionals who will do anything for their patients, some are good with people some are not, some are funny some are serious, some are obsessed workaholics while others are looking for shortcuts, some are mediocre and lazy, some are depressed and addicted, some are greedy and in it for personal gain.....just like any other group of people. This could be said about all professions. But doctors take the Hippocratic oath and should be held to the standards and principles in that oath 100% of the time.
I would like to hear

Read More

A must read on healthcare

A must read on healthcare costs and waste http://www.nytimes.com/mem/emailthis.html. Take a look at this article from today's NYT. Here is one pertinent quote...
"much is done that does not benefit patients at all, and many doctors know it", Dr. Donald Berwick, departing chief of Medicare and Medicaid services

Shouldn't all people be held

Shouldn't all people be held to a moral code?
Name another profession that is more closely monitored than medicine.

I guarantee you that 99% of physicians would agree with me when I say, financial interest has very little to do with decision making. It would be more like:

1. Patient well-being
2. Medical-legal, CYA

From a surgical perspective there is no amount of money worth to treat an unhappy patient, deal with complications (ie, for doing something for the wrong indication), or to handle a law suit.

I practically have no idea how much I am compensated

Read More

to Bratney - your comments

to Bratney - your comments demonstrate your lack of knowledge of the health care system as a whole. In the 1990's a surgeon was paid approximately $3000 from Medicare to perform a total hip replacement. Today they are paid about $1500. When you consider that a surgeons practice has about 50% overhead that reimbursement to the doctor is really about $750. If the doctor is in the 50% tax bracket (earns more than $250K per year) then this is really $375. So this doctor who performed the surgery, monitored the care of the patient in the hospital and in the

Read More

Trav...I am glad to hear that

Trav...I am glad to hear that your experience of doctors is that 99% do not take financial interests into consideration....but that leaves me confused about the original article which was ALL about the doctor's financial interests and most of these comments have been about doctors' financial interests.

To OrthoDon: It is ashame

To OrthoDon: It is ashame that you continue a trend in these comments of disparaging my intelligence and knowledge of the healthcare field which I actually know extremely well. Your example of doctor pay for a hip replacement is not accurate, but even taking your example, I have a few questions. Who is in the 50% tax bracket? I don't care about the aftertax income, I am asking about the taxable income. How much is the doctor in your example making per hour, per day, per surgery, per year? Glad that you know so many doctors who place the

Read More

This has been a very

This has been a very interesting experience engaging with many people about doctors, compensation, healthcare costs, etc. it is not something I do very often. Many of the comments have been interesting and thought provoking...thank you. Many others are equally interesting but not very thought provoking.
There are a couple recurring themes in your replies to me: The need to disparage my intelligence and/or knowledge. Using worn out talking points rather than full thoughts. Using gross generalizations and exagerations to make a point....None of these help a discussion.
I am amazed by the whining and complaining by doctors and/or on

Read More

I don't disagree with Bratney

I don't disagree with Bratney that our health care is in need of repair. The most effective way to save money is not to chop down the physicians. Actual charges by physicians is likely a small portion in the grand scheme of healthcare.

Your comment "Trav...I am glad to hear that your experience of doctors is that 99% do not take financial interests into consideration....but that leaves me confused about the original article which was ALL about the doctor's financial interests and most of these comments have been about doctors' financial interests." - Of course we worry

Read More