Skip to main content
NCBI home page
American Journal of Public Health logoLink to American Journal of Public Health
. 1983 Apr;73(4):379–383. doi: 10.2105/ajph.73.4.379

The Organization of Medical Practice and Primary Care Physician Income

Fredric D Wolinsky, William D Marder
PMCID: PMC1650775  PMID: 6681942

Abstract

This study investigates the effect of the organization of medical practice, e.g., solo, fee-for-service group, or health maintenance organization (HMO) settings, on primary care physicians' net incomes. Using pooled data on 2,372 primary care physicians, multivariate regression analysis is used to adjust physicians' 1979 net incomes for differences in medical specialty, workload, sex, and experience before estimating the effects of the organization of medical practice. Among HMO physicians, only those in staff model HMOs were found to have significantly lower net incomes than their fee-for-service group practice counterparts. Accordingly, there is little evidence to support the popular belief that physicians practicing in HMOs consistently earn less than their fee-for-service counterparts. (Am J Public Health 1983; 73:379-383.)

Full text

PDF
379

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Kehrer B. H. Factors affecting the incomes of men and women physicians: an exploratory analysis. J Hum Resour. 1976 Fall;11(4):526–545. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Krill M. A., Gayner R. R. What is the future of prepaid medical practice? Med Group Manage. 1982 Jan-Feb;29(1):42–47. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Langwell K. M. Factors affecting the incomes of men and women physicians: further explorations. J Hum Resour. 1982 Spring;17(2):261–275. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. LoGerfo J. P. Hypertension. Management in a prepaid health care project. JAMA. 1975 Jul 21;233(3):245–248. doi: 10.1001/jama.233.3.245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. LoGerfo J. P., Larson E., Richardson W. C. Assessing the quality of care for urinary tract infection in office practice: a comparative organizational study. Med Care. 1978 Jun;16(6):488–495. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197806000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Luft H. S. Assessing the evidence on HMO performance. Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc. 1980 Fall;58(4):501–536. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Luft H. S. How do health-maintenance organizations achieve their "savings"? N Engl J Med. 1978 Jun 15;298(24):1336–1343. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197806152982404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Luft H. S. Trends in medical care costs. Do HMOs lower the rate of growth? Med Care. 1980 Jan;18(1):1–16. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198001000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Luft H. S. Why do HMOs seem to provide more health maintenance services? Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc. 1978 Spring;56(2):140–168. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Mechanic D. General medical practice: some comparisons between the work of primary care physicians in the United States and England and Wales. Med Care. 1972 Sep-Oct;10(5):402–420. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197209000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Mechanic D. The orginization of medical practice and practice orientations among physicians in prepaid and nonprepaid primary care settings. Med Care. 1975 Mar;13(3):189–204. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197503000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Wolinsky F. D., Marder W. D. Spending time with patients: the impact of organizational structure on medical practice. Med Care. 1982 Oct;20(10):1051–1059. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Wolinsky F. D. The performance of Health Maintenance Organizations: an analytic review. Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc. 1980 Fall;58(4):537–587. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from American Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of American Public Health Association

RESOURCES