Jackson & Coker Industry Report
 
VOLUME I - NUMBER 1- JANUARY 2008 SUBSCRIBE NOW!
Complimentary copy only,
click for free subscription.

The Jackson & Coker Industry Report is a compendium of healthcare news, commentary, and other important information for busy physicians and hospital / practice administrators. The monthly newsletter incorporates original research and studies supplied to Jackson & Coker by a nationally recognized research firm.

WILLING TO RELOCATE SURVEY
Next Month's Survey
Understanding Residents' Expectations

What motivates physicians to accept a specific practice opportunity involving relocation?  The trends today are far different from 20 years ago, when Jackson & Coker first surveyed doctors interested in permanent employment options. ...more

DECIDING FACTORS

DEMOGRAPHICS ...more

EDITORIAL

Welcoming a New Year and Publication!

With the start of a new year, we proudly present a new online publication geared toward busy physicians and hospital / practice administrators:   Jackson & Coker Industry Report

Our monthly newsletter offers timely information related to the healthcare industry at large and physician staffing in particular.  Each edition will contain hard-hitting medical news along with informative articles that discuss employment and compensation trends, recruitment and staffing solutions, career development, medical technology, payer and reimbursement issues, provider credentialing, and legal affairs. 

We’re also planning to regularly publish industry surveys focusing on physician recruitment, relocation, compensation and similar concerns.  The lead feature in our inaugural issue is an updated “Willing to Relocate Survey.”  First commissioned by Jackson & Coker 20 years ago, the survey findings compare the principal motivating factors--then and now--that influence why doctors opt to make a career change involving relocation.

Future issues of the Jackson & Coker Industry Report will spotlight special reports on “hot topics” within the healthcare industry that are of particular interest to our readers.  We appreciate reader feedback and look forward to providing a valuable service and resource to career-minded physicians and hospital / practice administrators who want to be more effective in their roles.   

Cordially,

Calvin Bruce
Managing Editor

FEATURE ARTICLES

Exclusive Survey-Expenses: Rising Costs Hit All Physicians

Limits Weighed on Physician-Owned Hospitals

Looming Medicare Pay Cut Forces Tough Decisions on Participation

Real-Time Payment: What’s Holding it Back?

Physicians Fight AETNA Over Caps on Out-of-Network Pay

FDA Approves Fewest Drugs Since 1983

Be Careful What You Promise

U.S. Lags in Halting Preventable Death


Additional Categories

Industry News

Staffing & Recruitment

Employment & Compensation

Medical - Legal Matters

Medical Specialty Focus

Payer & Reimbursement Issues

Credentialing, Licensure, Quality Management

Healthcare Technology


 
Industry News

Back to Top

 


Exclusive Survey-Expenses: Rising Costs Hit All Physicians
Source: Medical Economics
Date: 12/07/2007

According to a survey issued by Medical Economics, the cost of running a medical practice continues to escalate due to increases in general expenditures like payroll, energy costs, office facilities, and malpractice and healthcare premiums. Other line item expenses vary depending on the type of practice. The following indicates the median annual cost for primary care practices, excluding bonuses or retirement/profit sharing contributions:

Family practitioners: $235,000

General practitioners: $180,000

Internists: $200,000

Ob/gyns: $360,100

Pediatricians: $266,300

All primary care: $240,000

Ob/gyns and pediatricians, the two physician groups with the highest costs, generally use midlevel providers more frequently than their internist colleagues, thereby increasing their payroll expenses. With regard to pediatrician practices, immunizations are largely responsible for the high operating costs. Pediatricians’ median drug supply costs are $82,800 according to MGMA, compared to internists, who pay just over $8,000. Low reimbursement rates coupled with storage costs on vaccines mean that pediatric practices sometimes fail to break even on immunization costs.

With regard to location, inner city physicians spend less and make less compared to their urban, suburban and rural peers. Conversely, suburban practices, with generally higher expenses, have to rely on higher patient volumes to offset more expensive facilities and higher rental rates. Suburban practices also add to their expenses by keeping longer hours to satisfy the schedules of commuting families.



Full Article | Comments | Back To Top



Limits Weighed on Physician-Owned Hospitals
Source: The Washington Post
Date: 12/09/2007

The recent debate surrounding Medicare pay reductions has reignited political interest in the politically contentious topic of physician-owned hospitals; namely, the question of whether physicians should be able to own the hospitals to which they send their patients.

Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee supports the reforms due to the allegedly negative effect that physician-owned “specialty hospitals” have on community hospitals. According to the senator, specialty hospitals “pass the buck” on emergency care and “cherry-pick based on profits rather than patient needs.” Traditional hospitals complain of lost business and conflict of interest, while the backers of physician-owned hospitals say they promote competition and improve the quality of care.

Congress imposed a temporary moratorium in 2004 on establishing new physician-owned hospitals amidst lobbying pressure from both sides. The moratorium has since expired, and interest in the topic reemerged in August when the House passed a Democrat-sponsored measure that would limit physician investment in existing doctor-owned hospitals to 40 percent, and individual stakes to no more than 2 percent, while banning the creation of new physician-owned hospitals. The issue is unlikely to receive congressional action before the New Year.

Full Article | Comments | Back To Top



FDA Approves Fewest Drugs Since 1983
Source: The Wall Street Journal
Date: 01/08/2008

Business and financial outlet Bloomberg recently reported that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved only 19 new drugs for all of last year, the lowest total since 1983. These recent numbers confirm the struggles and difficulty of drug companies to come up with new products. Of the 19 newly FDA approved drugs, 17 of them are molecular entities, meaning they are entirely different and innovative drugs. The other two approved drugs were biotech drugs. The companies with most approvals this past year were Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline, each receiving two approvals a piece.

Many industry insiders blame the decreased approvals on tougher regulations and standards by the FDA. The FDA, however, defends its standards and claims that they have not altered their requirements at all. There are many hypotheses within the industry as to why there has been such a decrease in drug approval rates recently but none that are widely agreed upon or seemingly accurate.

One of the more popular arguments from doctors is that the pharmacy industry has become too overpopulated and bloated as well as too bureaucratic and risk averse. It is also possible that the industry has shifted its efforts away from novel drugs and more towards modifying pre-existing medicines in order to fully maximize sales during this apparent research drought. It is also probable that the majority of the more simplistic drugs have already been found and that drug researchers will need a major scientific discovery or breakthrough before they can come up with any fresh and relevant drugs.

Full Article | Comments | Back To Top