Isn’t the best way to contain healthcare costs to eliminate fee-for-service medicine, which rewards doctors for doing more tests and procedures?
Background Information
Debate Question:This is what a short summary question would look like.
Historically, most healthcare in the US has been paid on a fee-for-service (FFS) basis, where providers earn a fee for each test or procedure. More recently, many alternative payment methods have been tried, including paying a fixed fee for caring for a group of patients (“capitation”), paying a fixed fee for an episode of care (such as a hospital stay), or paying for achievement of specific health outcomes.
in favor
against
The fee-for-service FFS model is responsible for wasteful spending in the form of unnecessary or redundant services because it provides incentives for providers to deliver more care.
Zetema Panelist In Favor
+1 Good Point
FFS isn’t responsible for skyrocketing medical costs. That’s inherent in third-party payment models, in which the patient isn’t the one bearing most of the cost.
Zetema Panelist Against
Good Point+1
FFS in the United States has resulted in disproportionately high physician charges, which are a key part of overall costs.
Zetema Panelist In Favor
+1 Good Point
Charges are based on supply and demand, not how providers are paid.
Zetema Panelist Against
Good Point+1
Moving away from FFS would shift the responsibility for balancing the cost and quality of care from insurance companies to providers, who are more qualified to make decisions about what is appropriate.
Zetema Panelist In Favor
+1 Good Point
Under FFS, providers are trusted to use sound clinical judgment in providing care to their patients, rather than letting cost dictate which services are appropriate.
Zetema Panelist Against
Good Point+1
FFS rewards doctors for taking care of sick patients, rather than providing preventive care. With FFS, sick patients are more profitable than healthy ones.
Zetema Panelist In Favor
+1 Good Point
Most doctors care very much about their patients’ health and don’t want them to be sick. FFS ensures that clinicians provide appropriate services based on patient needs, not on cost.
Zetema Panelist Against
Good Point+1
FFS discourages team-based care, since tasks done by non-clinicians are typically paid at lower rates or not at all.
Zetema Panelist In Favor
+1 Good Point
With improved regulations, FFS would allow better payment for other team members and would be a much fairer payment model than alternatives such as capitation.
Zetema Panelist Against
Good Point+1
FFS offers little incentive for high quality, evidence-based medicine, since services are funded regardless of how likely they are to improve patient health.
Zetema Panelist In Favor
+1 Good Point
Alternatives to FFS don’t necessarily offer any better incentives to provide high quality care based on evidence. Fixes to that problem can be made under any payment system.