PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 29, 1988New England Journal of Medicine383 citations

Estimating Physicians' Work for a Resource-Based Relative-Value Scale

View Full Paper
WHWilliam C. HsiaoPBPeter BraunDYDouwe B. Yntema

Key Points

  • To estimate physicians' work for various services and determine the reliability and validity of these estimates.
  • Developed a resource-based relative-value scale incorporating total work input, practice costs, and specialty training costs.
  • Defined and estimated physician's work across four major dimensions: time, mental effort, technical skill, and psychological stress.
  • Evaluated the reproducibility and consistency of physician ratings of work across services.
  • Physicians can reliably rate the relative amount of work for services considering all four major work dimensions.
  • The ratings were found to be highly reproducible and consistent, indicating probable validity of the estimates.

Abstract

We have developed a resource-based relative-value scale as an alternative to the system of payment based on charges for physicians' services. Resource inputs by physicians include (1) total work input performed by the physician for each service; (2) practice costs, including malpractice premiums; and (3) the cost of specialty training. These factors were combined to produce a relative-value scale denominated in nonmonetary units. We describe here the process by which the physician's work was defined and estimated. The study asked two questions: What is the physician's work for each service performed? and Can work be estimated reliably and validly? We concluded that a physician's work has four major dimensions: time, mental effort and judgment, technical skill and physical effort, and psychological stress. We found that physicians can rate the relative amount of work of the services within their specialty directly, taking into account all the dimensions of work. Moreover, these ratings are highly reproducible, consistent, and therefore probably valid.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hsiao et al. (1988) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0e2a35feb2455d62c8334bhttps://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198809293191305
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper