Abstract
Background: Physician's dissatisfaction is reported to be increasing, especially in primary care. The transition from fee-for-service to outcome-based reimbursements may make matters worse.
Purpose/Objective: To investigate influences of provider attitudes and practice settings on job satisfaction/dissatisfaction during transition to quality-based payment models, we assessed self-reported satisfaction/dissatisfaction with practice in a Rochester (New York)-area physician practice association in the process of implementing pay-for-performance.
Subjects/Methods: We linked cross-sectional data for 215 survey respondents on satisfaction ratings and behavioral attitudes with medical record data on their clinical behavior and practices, and census data on their catchment population. Factors associated with the odds of being satisfied or dissatisfied were determined via predictive multivariable logistic regression modeling.
Results/Conclusions: Dissatisfied physicians were more likely to have larger-than-average patient panels, lower autonomy and/or control, and beliefs that quality incentives were hindering patient care. Satisfied physicians were more likely to have a higher sense of autonomy and control, smaller patient volumes, and a less complex patient mix. Efforts to maintain or improve satisfaction among physicians should focus on encouraging professional autonomy during transitions from volume-based to quality/outcomes-based payment systems. An optimum balance between accountability and autonomy/control might maximize both health care quality and job satisfaction.