0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Time is money: general practitioners’ reflections on the fee-for-service system

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Fee-for-service is a common payment model for remunerating general practitioners (GPs) in OECD countries. In Norway, GPs earn two-thirds of their income through fee-for-service, which is determined by the number of consultations and procedures they register as fees. In general, fee-for-service incentivises many and short consultations and is associated with high service provision. GPs act as gatekeepers for various treatments and interventions, such as addictive drugs, antibiotics, referrals, and sickness certification. This study aims to explore GPs’ reflections on and perceptions of the fee-for-service system, with a specific focus on its potential impact on gatekeeping decisions.

          Methods

          We conducted six focus group interviews with 33 GPs in 2022 in Norway. We analysed the data using thematic analysis.

          Results

          We identified three main themes related to GPs’ reflections and perceptions of the fee-for-service system. First, the participants were aware of the profitability of different fees and described potential strategies to increase their income, such as having shorter consultations or performing routine procedures on all patients. Second, the participants acknowledged that the fees might influence GP behaviour. Two perspectives on the fees were present in the discussions: fees as incentives and fees as compensation. The participants reported that financial incentives were not directly decisive in gatekeeping decisions, but that rejecting requests required substantially more time compared to granting them. Consequently, time constraints may contribute to GPs' decisions to grant patient requests even when the requests are deemed unreasonable. Last, the participants reported challenges with remembering and interpreting fees, especially complex fees.

          Conclusions

          GPs are aware of the profitability within the fee-for-service system, believe that fee-for-service may influence their decision-making, and face challenges with remembering and interpreting certain fees. Furthermore, the fee-for-service system can potentially affect GPs’ gatekeeping decisions by incentivising shorter consultations, which may result in increased consultations with inadequate time to reject unnecessary treatments.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-024-10968-3.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups.

            This paper introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, running the groups, and analysing the results. Focus groups have advantages for researchers in the field of health and medicine: they do not discriminate against people who cannot read or write and they can encourage participation from people reluctant to be interviewed on their own or who feel they have nothing to say.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Focus-group interview and data analysis

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                kristianbandlien.kraft@fhi.no
                Journal
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Services Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6963
                15 April 2024
                15 April 2024
                2024
                : 24
                : 472
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Cluster for Health Services Research, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, ( https://ror.org/046nvst19) Oslo, Norway
                [2 ]Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, ( https://ror.org/01xtthb56) Oslo, Norway
                [3 ]Department of Community Medicine, UiT – The Arctic University of Norway, ( https://ror.org/00wge5k78) Tromsø, Norway
                [4 ]Office of the Auditor General of Norway, ( https://ror.org/0483q4e62) Oslo, Norway
                [5 ]Centre for Work and Mental Health, Nordland Hospital Trust, ( https://ror.org/04wjd1a07) Bodø, Norway
                [6 ]Faculty of Nursing and Health Sciences, Nord University, ( https://ror.org/030mwrt98) Bodø, Norway
                [7 ]Centre for Research and Education in Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, Haukeland University Hospital, ( https://ror.org/03np4e098) Bergen, Norway
                [8 ]Løkkegården GP Medical Centre, Ski, Norway
                Article
                10968
                10.1186/s12913-024-10968-3
                11020312
                38622602
                425f4c38-f8d0-4df8-adca-0f254bb4666e
                © The Author(s) 2024

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 15 December 2023
                : 9 April 2024
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100005416, Norges Forskningsråd;
                Award ID: 303583
                Award ID: 337430
                Award ID: 303583
                Award ID: 303583
                Award ID: 303583
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Norwegian Institute of Public Health (FHI)
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024

                Health & Social care
                general practice,remuneration,fee-for-service,gatekeeping,incentives,consultation length

                Comments

                Comment on this article