There are different means of payment for physicians, which are offered. Some of the payment methods depend on the number of patient that a doctor is able to attend to while others depend on the quality of services provided. All this methods have their own advantages and disadvantages.
This paper compares two models, the Capitation and Fee for Service model.
Capitation model is a compensation model that is population based. The compensation offered is calculated before delivery of services and does not consider the health status of the patient. Fee for service is a different method; physicians in this model are compensated based on a given rate per patient. The more patient that a physician is able to attend to, the more compensation is offered.
Capitation model has its own advantage in that patients are able to receive quality services compared to Fee for Service model. It also has one main disadvantage which is physicians may enroll healthy who do not require health care. Fee for service encourages physicians to offer low quality services to attend to more patients. To the physicians it is a better method of payment since it depends on individual effort. My recommendation would be the Capitation method because it ensures that patients receive quality treatment (Blomqvist & Busby, 2012).
The pay for performance model has various impacts on the patients, practitioners and the hospital at large Patients through this model of compensation have two options, to receive quality treatment or low quality treatment so that the physician can attend to more patients. If the patient receives low quality servicers, the hospital loses some of its clients due to low quality services. A system needs to be monitored to ensure that patients receive quality services. The main risk is assessing the performance of the physicians. Unless proper mechanisms are set, patients may not receive quality services (Vega, 2002).
Work Cited
Blomqvist, A. G., & Busby, C. (2012). How to pay family doctors why "pay per patient" is better than fee for service. Toronto, Ont.: C.D. Howe Institute.
Vega, C. (2002). A comparison of cost between a capitation and fee for service payment method for the management of insulin dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) in adults. AT: medhel.
