Search

Background: Disparities in remuneration between primary care and other physician specialties may impede health care reform by undermining the sustainability of a primary care workforce. Previous studies have compared annual incomes across specialties unadjusted for work hours. Wage (earnings-per-hour) comparisons could better inform the physician payment debate., Methods: In a cross-sectional analysis of data from 6381 physicians providing patient care in the 2004-2005 Community Tracking Study (adjusted response rate, 53%), we compared wages across broad and narrow categories of physician specialties. Tobit and linear regressions were run. Four broad specialty categories (primary care, surgery, internal medicine and pediatric subspecialties, and other) and 41 specific specialties were analyzed together with demographic, geographic, and market variables., Results: In adjusted analyses on broad categories, wages for surgery, internal medicine and pediatric subspecialties, and other specialties were 48%, 36%, and 45% higher, respectively, than for primary care specialties. In adjusted analyses for 41 specific specialties, wages were significantly lower for the following than for the reference group of general surgery (wage near median, $85.98): internal medicine and pediatrics combined (-$24.36), internal medicine (-$24.27), family medicine (-$23.70), and other pediatric subspecialties (-$23.44). Wage rankings were largely impervious to adjustment for control variables, including age, race, sex, and region., Conclusions: Wages varied substantially across physician specialties and were lowest for primary care specialties. The primary care wage gap was likely conservative owing to exclusion of radiologists, anesthesiologists, and pathologists. In light of low and declining medical student interest in primary care, these findings suggest the need for payment reform aimed at increasing incomes or reducing work hours for primary care physicians.

Background: The career satisfaction and dissatisfaction physicians experience likely influence the quality of medical care., Objective: To compare career satisfaction across specialties among US physicians., Methods: We analyzed data from the Community Tracking Study of 12 474 physicians (response rate, 65%) for the late 1990s. Data are cross-sectional. Two satisfaction variables were created: very satisfied and dissatisfied. Thirty-three specialty categories were analyzed., Results: After adjusting for control variables, the following specialties are significantly more likely than family medicine to be very satisfying: geriatric internal medicine (odds ratio [OR], 2.04); neonatal-perinatal medicine (OR, 1.89); dermatology (OR, 1.48); and pediatrics (OR, 1.36). The following are significantly more likely than family medicine to be dissatisfying: otolaryngology (OR, 1.78); obstetrics-gynecology (OR, 1.61); ophthalmology (OR, 1.51); orthopedics (OR, 1.36); and internal medicine (OR, 1.22). Among the control variables, we also found nonlinear relations between age and satisfaction; high satisfaction among physicians in the west north Central and New England states and high dissatisfaction in the south Atlantic, west south Central, Mountain, and Pacific states; positive associations between income and satisfaction; and no differences between women and men., Conclusions: Career satisfaction and dissatisfaction vary across specialty as well as age, income, and region. These variations are likely to be of interest to residency directors, managed care administrators, students selecting a specialty, and physicians in the groups with high satisfaction and dissatisfaction.

Objective: To estimate the direct and indirect costs of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) in the United States in 1997., Design: Aggregation and analysis of national data sets collected by the National Center for Health Statistics, the Health Care Financing Administration, and other government bureaus and private firms. To estimate costs, we used the human capital method, which decomposes costs into direct categories, such as medical expenses, and indirect categories, such as lost earnings and lost home production. We consider HCV that results in chronic liver disease separate from HCV that results in primary liver cancer., Results: We estimate $5.46 billion as the cost of HCV in 1997. Costs are split as follows: 33% for direct and 67% for indirect costs. Hepatitis C virus that results in chronic liver disease contributes roughly 92% of the costs, and HCV that results in primary liver cancer contributes the remaining 8%. The total estimate of $5.46 billion is conservative, because we ignore costs associated with pain and suffering and the value of care rendered by family members., Conclusions: To our knowledge, only one estimate of the annual costs of HCV in the 1990s has appeared in the literature, $0.6 billion. However, that estimate was not supported by an explanation of the methods. Our estimate, which relies on detailed methods, is nearly 10 times the original estimate. Our estimate of $5.46 billion is on a par with the cost of asthma ($5.8 billion [1994]).

Objective: To estimate the annual incidence, the mortality and the direct and indirect costs associated with occupational injuries and illnesses in the United States in 1992., Design: Aggregation and analysis of national and large regional data sets collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the National Council on Compensation Insurance, the National Center for Health Statistics, the Health Care Financing Administration, and other governmental bureaus and private firms., Methods: To assess incidence of and mortality from occupational injuries and illnesses, we reviewed data from national surveys and applied an attributable risk proportion method. To assess costs, we used the human capital method that decomposes costs into direct categories such as medical and insurance administration expenses as well as indirect categories such as lost earnings, lost home production, and lost fringe benefits. Some cost estimates were drawn from the literature while others were generated within this study. Total costs were calculated by multiplying average costs by the number of injuries and illnesses in each diagnostic category., Results: Approximately 6500 job-related deaths from injury, 13.2 million nonfatal injuries, 60,300 deaths from disease, and 862,200 illnesses are estimated to occur annually in the civilian American workforce. The total direct ($65 billion) plus indirect ($106 billion) costs were estimated to be $171 billion. Injuries cost $145 billion and illnesses $26 billion. These estimates are likely to be low, because they ignore costs associated with pain and suffering as well as those of within-home care provided by family members, and because the numbers of occupational injuries and illnesses are likely to be undercounted., Conclusions: The costs of occupational injuries and illnesses are high, in sharp contrast to the limited public attention and societal resources devoted to their prevention and amelioration. Occupational injuries and illnesses are an insufficiently appreciated contributor to the total burden of health care costs in the United States.

Background: To determine whether patients with rheumatoid arthritis and their physicians make appropriate decisions regarding referral to rheumatologists and the need for continuing rheumatology care, we examined the relationship between the progression of functional disability in these patients and their use of rheumatology subspecialty care over time., Methods: A cohort of 282 patients with rheumatoid arthritis was followed prospectively for up to 10 years. Participants were categorized into three subgroups based on the pattern of care received from rheumatologists over the study period: patients who were never treated by a rheumatologist; patients treated by a rheumatologist only intermittently; and patients treated by a rheumatologist at least once during each 6-month study period. The outcome was the rate of progression of functional disability, measured using the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index., Results: Among the 52 patients who had not been referred to a rheumatologist, 30 (58%) had rates of progression of functional disability that were stable or improving over time (rate < 0.01 Disability Index units per year), while 22 (42%) had rates that were worsening (rate > or = 0.01 Disability Index units per year). Among patients treated by rheumatologists, the average rate of progression was substantially lower among the 69 patients who were treated regularly by a rheumatologist than among 161 patients treated by rheumatologists intermittently (0.008 Disability Index units per year vs 0.020 Disability Index units per year). This difference was associated with more intensive use of second-line antirheumatic medications, and more frequent joint surgeries, among patients treated by rheumatologists on a regular basis., Conclusions: Most patients with rheumatoid arthritis in this community cohort were treated by a rheumatologist, but 42% of those not referred had progressively increasing functional disability. Among patients treated by rheumatologists, those who had continuing care from rheumatologists experienced lower rates of progression of functional disability than those who had only intermittent care. These results suggest that use of rheumatology subspecialty care is associated with better health outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis.

The initial results of a 12-month controlled trial of a health promotion program in 5686 Bank of America retirees, randomized into full program, questionnaire only, and insurance claims only groups, were analyzed to determine whether the health promotion program was effective. Comparisons were between program and questionnaire only groups for self-reported health habit changes, health risk scores, medical care utilization, and days confined to home, and between all groups for insurance claims data. The intervention, or full program, included health habit questionnaires administered every 6 months, individualized time-oriented health risk appraisals, personal recommendation letters, self-management materials, and a health promotion book. Twelve-month changes in health habits, health status, and economic variables favored the full program group in 31 of 32 comparisons and were statistically significant at the .05 level in two-tailed tests in 19 comparisons and at the .01 level in two-tailed tests in 13 comparisons. Over 12 months, overall computed health risk scores decreased by 4.3% in the full program experimental group and increased by 7.2% in the questionnaire only control group. Total direct and indirect costs decreased by 11% in the experimental group and increased by 6.3% in the questionnaire only control group. Analysis of claims data confirmed these trends. A low-cost health promotion program for retirees was effective in changing health behaviors and has potential to decrease health care utilization.