Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
  • Log out
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
Brief ReportPolicy Briefs

Rewarding Family Medicine While Penalizing Comprehensiveness? Primary Care Payment Incentives and Health Reform: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)

Stephen Petterson, Andrew W. Bazemore, Robert L. Phillips, Imam M. Xierali, Jason Rinaldo, Larry A. Green and James C. Puffer
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine November 2011, 24 (6) 637-638; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2011.06.110172
Stephen Petterson
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrew W. Bazemore
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert L. Phillips
MD, MSPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Imam M. Xierali
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jason Rinaldo
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Larry A. Green
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James C. Puffer
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Family physicians' scope of work is exceptionally broad, particularly with increasing rurality. Provisions for Medicare bonus payment specified in the health care reform bill (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) used a narrow definition of primary care that inadvertently offers family physicians disincentives to delivering comprehensive primary care.

Recognizing the value of the primary care function, the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act provided a 10% Medicare bonus to primary care practitioners. “Primary care practitioners” originally included family physicians, general internists, geriatricians, pediatricians, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, and physician assistants for whom primary care services represent 50% or more of their Medicare physician fee schedule–allowed charges in a prior period.

We used 2006 Part B Medicare claims data to estimate the percentage of any family physician's total charges for evaluation and management (E&M) and three other key services reflective of differing scope across the rural to urban continuum (Figure 1). We then estimated the percentage of physicians eligible for the bonus in urban, large rural, small rural, isolated rural, and frontier areas.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 1.

Percent of family physician claims by type of service and rurality.

The results affirm the broad scope of practice inherent to family medicine and its variation across the rural to urban continuum. With increasing rurality, primary care physicians increasingly provide care in hospital, emergency room, and surgical settings. Defining primary care based on provision of a select set of E&M codes, however, disproportionately excludes many rural physicians who are more likely to provide non-E&M services. Using the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act approach, we found that just 53% of family physicians and 33% of other primary care providers would be eligible for the Medicare bonus.

In light of our findings, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has revised its approach to calculating the threshold. Their remedy—excluding hospital services when determining total charges—increases the eligibility of family physicians to 80%.1 Although this is a step in the right direction, some family physicians, especially those in rural areas, still risk being penalized rather than rewarded for a broad scope of practice. The versatility of family physicians in adapting to meet their communities' primary care needs, especially those in rural areas, may defy any single category of E&M or Current Procedural Terminology codes. In addition, policymakers must adapt any definition used to increase primary care payment to serve a broader goal: to support primary care practices, not just physicians.

Notes

  • Funding: Funding has been provided by the American Board of Family Medicine, which contracts annually for health policy/health services research conducted by the Robert Graham Center for Policy Studies–related Maintenance of Certification and Quality.

  • Conflict of interest: none declared.

  • See Related Article on Page 633.

  • Received for publication May 10, 2011.
  • Revision received August 11, 2011.
  • Accepted for publication August 15, 2011.

References

  1. 1.↵
    http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-27969.pdf.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family     Medicine: 24 (6)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 24, Issue 6
November-December 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Rewarding Family Medicine While Penalizing Comprehensiveness? Primary Care Payment Incentives and Health Reform: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
12 + 5 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Rewarding Family Medicine While Penalizing Comprehensiveness? Primary Care Payment Incentives and Health Reform: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)
Stephen Petterson, Andrew W. Bazemore, Robert L. Phillips, Imam M. Xierali, Jason Rinaldo, Larry A. Green, James C. Puffer
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Nov 2011, 24 (6) 637-638; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2011.06.110172

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Rewarding Family Medicine While Penalizing Comprehensiveness? Primary Care Payment Incentives and Health Reform: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)
Stephen Petterson, Andrew W. Bazemore, Robert L. Phillips, Imam M. Xierali, Jason Rinaldo, Larry A. Green, James C. Puffer
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Nov 2011, 24 (6) 637-638; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2011.06.110172
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Family Physician Scope of Practice: What It Is and Why It Matters
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Variation in Scope and Area of Practice by Family Physician Race and Ethnicity
  • More Comprehensive Care Among Family Physicians is Associated with Lower Costs and Fewer Hospitalizations
  • Back to the Future: Reflections on the History of the Future of Family Medicine
  • Family Physician Scope of Practice: What It Is and Why It Matters
  • Change, Lack of Change, and Creating Optimal Change Out of Chaos
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Federal Research Funding for Family Medicine: Highly Concentrated, with Decreasing New Investigator Awards
  • Lost in Translation: NIH Funding for Family Medicine Research Remains Limited
Show more Policy Briefs

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire