Providers receive fixed payments per patient, regardless of the actual costs incurred in providing care. If the cost of delivering care exceeds the capitated payments received, providers may experience financial losses. Therefore, providers must manage resources efficiently, control costs, and optimize patient outcomes to ensure financial sustainability under capitation arrangements. Arora and Jain recommended that organizations provide capitation payments to specialists based on the percentage of health plan premiums. By providing a fixed payment upfront, healthcare providers have an incentive to manage their costs while also providing appropriate care for their patients. This can lead to better patient outcomes and cost savings for the healthcare provider and the payer.

Capitation payments are often utilized in managed care organizations, such as health maintenance organizations (HMOs) or accountable care organizations (ACOs). These organizations negotiate contracts with healthcare providers, agreeing to pay them a set capitated amount per patient, usually on a monthly or quarterly basis. Capitation payments are fixed payments to a medical provider from a state or a health plan. These payments are paid monthly for each member enrolled in the health care plan. No matter how many times the member visits the provider during the year, the payment amount doesn’t change. Capitation payments are defined, periodic, per-patient payments (usually monthly) for each individual enrolled in a capitated insurance plan.

An example of capitation is an HMO that negotiates a fee of $500 per year per member with an approved PCP. For an HMO group comprised of 1,000 members, the PCP would be paid $500,000 per year and, in return, be expected to supply all authorized medical services to those members for that year. Capitation models implemented during the HMO movement of the 1990s resulted in significant backlash from both providers and patients who did not like lack of choice. If the HMO in this example has 500 patients, the PCP/medical group will be paid a guaranteed amount of $22,500 per month (or $270,000 per year) with $30,000 in the “risk pool”.

How Independent Physicians Can Optimize the Revenue Cycle Management Process

At the same time, in order to ensure that patients do not receive suboptimal care through the under-utilization of health care services, insurance companies measure rates of resource utilization in physician practices. These reports are publicly available and can be linked to financial rewards, such as bonuses. The payment varies depending on the capitation agreement, but generally, they are based on characteristics such as the age of the individual enrolled in the plan. Modifying the plan, according to specific characteristics for groups of patients, is one way to compensate providers for the medical care expected for similar ailments within a group. Compared with the capitation alternative, fee-for-service (FFS), it’s supposed to be more cost-effective, hence the reason providers look to limit face time with doctors.

With capitation, the physician—otherwise what is capitation in medical billing known as the primary care physician (PCP)— is paid a set amount for each enrolled patient whether a patient seeks care or not. The PCP is usually contracted with a health maintenance organization (HMO) whose role it is to recruit patients. As a result, providers can earn more money for some members, particularly those more likely to require more complicated medical care. A capitation is a predetermined amount of money that a state or health plan pays a doctor in advance for a predetermined time. Even with the carve-out services handled separately, there is a risk that patient care costs more than the payment provided.

For example, a provider could be paid per month, per patient, despite how many times the patient comes in for treatment or how many services are needed. Health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and independent practice associations (IPAs) often use capitation programs. Another benefit of capitation payments over FFS is that it reduces the possibility of doctors recommending unneeded medical care to increase their payment. That’s because they assume more of the financial risk if the cost of services exceeds capitation payments. The alternative to capitation payments is FFS, where providers are paid based on the number of services provided. Lastly, global capitation reimbursement covers all services for a patient population.

Streamline Your Small Practice With Customized Solutions

The healthcare industry now bears the financial risk, not the insurance industry. To better understand the advantages and disadvantages of this type of medical billing, let’s take a deeper look at capitation. In the 1990s, this concept was further developed as part of the managed care movement. Managed care organizations, such as health maintenance organizations and preferred provider organizations (PPOs), used capitation to incentivize healthcare providers to manage costs and utilization. This was done by providing financial incentives to providers who delivered high-quality care while keeping costs low.

How to Choose the Right Medical Billing Software for Your Small Practice

Capitation is the headcount for a group (such as IPA or HMO) that the fees are based on. Thomas J Catalano is a CFP and Registered Investment Adviser with the state of South Carolina, where he launched his own financial advisory firm in 2018. Thomas’ experience gives him expertise in a variety of areas including investments, retirement, insurance, and financial planning.

For example, a health maintenance organization (HMO) may enter into an agreement with a primary care physician (PCP) or medical group for a year, with a negotiated rate of $50 per patient per month. The HMO may ask to withhold 10% of this amount, or $5 per patient per month, and place it in the “risk pool”. In this scenario, the actual payment that the PCP/medical group receives per member per month is $45.

This payment model fosters greater efficiency, reduces unnecessary healthcare utilization, and promotes patient-centered care by aligning financial incentives with improved outcomes and cost containment. Compared to a fee-for-service model of medical billing, capitation payments can help reduce waste and prevent rising health care costs. However, it puts financial risk on health care providers instead of on insurance companies. Let’s explore capitation in more detail to help you better understand the pros and cons of this type of medical billing. Capitation payments play a significant role in healthcare finance by shifting the focus from individual services to the overall health of the patient population. By reimbursing healthcare providers based on the number of enrolled patients rather than specific services rendered, capitation payments promote efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and improved population health outcomes.

1. A capitation payment is a fixed amount of money paid in advance to a medical provider by a state or health plan for an agreed amount of time.
2. In accordance with this system, the medical practice gets paid a predetermined sum each month for each registered member, known as the capitation payment.
3. In exchange for a capitation fee, the medical provider agrees to provide all necessary health care for each member.
4. Let’s explore capitation in more detail to help you better understand the pros and cons of this type of medical billing.

Some of the above drawbacks may potentially lead into a vicious cycle that eventually results in providers losing money when participating in a capitation payment model. This could push them to go back to the FFS model with its attendant challenges and shortcomings. This system helps doctors reduce bookkeeping, accounting, and other operating costs. Capitation also benefits the HMO or IPA by ensuring that providers don’t undertake more services than necessary. In return, the physician would be expected to cover all expenses related to treating those 5,000 patients. As the industry continues to place emphasis on value-based care delivery, capitated payments may become more popular as a way to provide high quality, cost-efficient care to patients.

Administrative Challenges? Here Are Practical Solutions for Independent Practices

A goal of pre-payment in CMS Innovation Center models is to provide a stable, upfront payment to health care providers so they can focus on their patients’ health needs and avoid unnecessary, high-cost care. Furthermore, receiving a set upfront payment for a patient’s care enables providers to deliver services that may not be individually payable according to Medicare’s payment system. For example, pre-payment may be used to offer additional preventive care to keep patients healthier, longer and better care management. Health care practices may hire care managers and social workers to help coordinate patients’ health care and respond to their health-related social needs, such as access to healthy food options and safe housing. In a capitated payment system, the financial risk is typically borne by the healthcare provider or organization responsible for delivering care to the enrolled population.

The groups most likely to benefit from a healthcare capitation system are the HMOs and IPAs. It does so by discouraging PCPs from providing more care than is necessary or using costly procedures that may be no more effective than less costly ones. It alleviates the risk of excessive billing for procedures that may or may not be necessary. In this model, the PCP may offer more preventive health screenings and services to avoid more expensive medical procedures. Conceptually, larger risk pools have lower utilization costs because the risk is spread between many members. However, this is not always the case as some groups, such as those with an older population, utilize healthcare much more.

The price does not change even if the member requires medical care more than once. Finance is a vast field with numerous concepts and jargon that can sometimes be confusing. One such concept that often comes up in the world of healthcare finance is capitation payments. In this article, we’ll explore these questions and shed light on this important aspect of healthcare finance.

Financial risk for patients with major medical issues is borne by the provider in the case of capitation agreements. In those circumstances, the provider may supplement the capitation model with FFS. In contrast, with capitation payments, the administration process is simpler. Instead of trying to code every item used for every procedure, the provider is paid a set amount for each patient.