The Rise Of Private Medicine In The U.S.: Considerations For Physicians
For years, we've been told that the healthcare system in America is just the way it is: complicated, inefficient and built more for insurance companies than for actual patients or doctors. But something is happening right now that many people don't seem to be paying attention to: More doctors are walking away from traditional insurance-based medicine and building private-pay, membership and concierge practices.
"While those practicing concierge and DPC medicine are a small percentage of the more than 1 million active doctors in the US, the industry is expanding," the Washingtonian reported. And many of these physicians, I've found, are not just doing it for better income; they're doing it because they want their careers and lives back. I know because I've helped dozens of doctors make that leap.
Why Private Medicine Has Gained Traction
Today, with rising deductibles, out-of-pocket costs and a growing frustration with the system, more patients are open to alternatives to traditional healthcare models. A 2022 survey by Hint Health found that 83% of patients would consider switching to a direct primary care membership-based model if their employer provided it.
At the same time, many doctors are exhausted. In 2021, nearly 63% of physicians reported experiencing at least one symptom of burnout—the highest rate ever recorded. Since then, that number has lowered to 45%, but U.S. physicians are still at higher risk of burnout relative to other occupations, the American Medical Association said. When you're seeing 30 to 40 patients a day just to keep your doors open and still battling insurance paperwork at night, it can be easy for some to forget why they went into medicine in the first place.
For some doctors, private medicine is preferable because it lets them focus on fewer patients and rewards better care, deeper relationships and proactive wellness. This is something I've watched happen firsthand. For instance, one primary care doctor I worked with went from 3,000 insurance patients to 250 concierge members and earned higher revenue in the first 18 months. She was able to spend more time with patients, lowered her stress and gained a higher income. Another client cut his work week in half without sacrificing his income.
I don't share these stories to brag, but to show how some doctors are changing how they practice. And the shift toward private pay doesn't appear to be slowing down. I expect the private-pay, concierge and membership medicine sector to continue growing. In fact, the concierge medicine industry is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 11.3% in 2028 and exceed $31 billion.
Considerations For Physicians
However, it's important to note that a private medicine model isn't the right fit for every doctor, and making the shift can bring a few challenges. For example, you'll need to shift your mindset from employee to entrepreneur, which isn't for everyone. That includes marketing your practice, building systems and managing growth. I've also seen there's often a learning curve in re-educating patients on membership-based care and its potential benefits. Most importantly, you'll need to be patient. Like any business, this model rewards commitment and consistency.
Given this, if you're a physician thinking of making this shift, there are a few questions to ask yourself:
• Am I constantly burned out, overworked or feeling disconnected from my patients?
• Do I want more time to focus on patient outcomes?
• Am I actually interested in building a business?
• Am I comfortable with the uncertainty of building something new?
• Do I enjoy the idea of marketing and managing my own practice?
• Am I ready to educate patients on a different model of care?
• Do I have the patience to grow something long-term rather than seek immediate results?
Ultimately, if you're a doctor who prefers structure, isn't interested in running a business or doesn't want to take on the risks of going solo, sticking with a traditional model may be a better path.
Final Thoughts
Many patients are tired, and so are many doctors. And I believe change is going to come from doctors who decide to build something different. This is just the beginning. In my view, the future of American healthcare isn't just in the hands of corporations or insurance companies. It's also in the hands of doctors who are willing to lead.
Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Dear Abby: My SIL is enabling her husband's alcoholism and I'm out of options
DEAR ABBY: My sister-in-law is her alcoholic husband's enabler. He has health conditions that make walking difficult. He falls down often and can't make it to the bathroom. Being drunk all the time (he consumes a fifth of vodka every two days) also prevents him from getting the surgery he needs. My SIL buys his liquor for him. She says if she doesn't, he will drive himself, endangering others. She has tried talking with his doctors, friends, family, priest, and rehab facilities. He won't go or listen. Taking care of him is wearing her down. He needs a medical facility that also treats addiction. Desperate to help her, I took her to an Al-Anon meeting so she could get support, but she found it 'boring.' I realize this is out of my control, and I'm finding it hard to listen and sympathize when she complains. What now? — ENABLER'S SISTER-IN-LAW DEAR S.I.L.: Your sister-in-law definitely could use some help. While I have mentioned AA and Al-Anon often in my column, another support resource I have heard good things about is called SMART Recovery. It is a space where loved ones of those who are struggling with addiction can find understanding, support, and a plan to regain control of their own lives. She can locate a Family and Friends meeting by visiting If she gives it a try, she may feel more comfortable there. ** ** ** DEAR ABBY: I am a 60-year-old retired woman, happily married with a positive mindset. I am very active and stay current on world events. I have noticed over the past few years that many of my friends only want to talk about themselves. I was taught that a conversation should be an opportunity for both parties to engage in talking and listening, but now it seems like when we get together for a meal, they go on and on about themselves or people I don't know. Then, at the end of the meal, they'll finally throw in a 'How are you?' I find this extremely rude. I should be able to get a word in edgewise during a conversation. What can I do so these long-winded friends won't leave me frustrated? — LISTENING PATIENTLY IN NEW YORK DEAR LISTENING: Older people who talk only about themselves may do it because their 'universe' has shrunk, and they have little else to talk about. The next time you are in this situation, really listen to what those friends are saying. If I am right, spend less time with them and concentrate on enlarging your social circle to include folks with whom you have more in common. Dear Abby is written by Abigail Van Buren, also known as Jeanne Phillips, and was founded by her mother, Pauline Phillips. Contact Dear Abby at or P.O. Box 69440, Los Angeles, CA 90069. Solve the daily Crossword
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
Early Access to Weight Loss Jabs in NICE Diabetes Plan
People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in England could be offered earlier access to newer treatments, including weight loss jabs, under draft guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The guidance, described as the 'biggest shake-up in care for a decade', would see a shift from a one-size-fits-all approach to a focus on personalised treatment to prevent heart failure, heart attacks, and other serious complications. Expanded Use of SGLT-2 Inhibitors The draft guidance recommends expanding access to sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, including canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, and ertugliflozin. Currently prescribed as a second-line option, SGLT-2 inhibitors would be available as a joint first-line treatment alongside metformin. They may also be used as monotherapy in patients intolerant to metformin. SGLT-2 inhibitors are once-daily tablets that selectively block the SGLT-2 cotransporter in the proximal renal tubule, responsible for reabsorbing about 90% of filtered glucose. This lowers the renal glucose threshold, increasing urinary glucose excretion and inducing mild osmotic diuresis. However, a 2024 NICE analysis of nearly 590,000 people with T2D in England found under-prescribing of these drugs, particularly among women, older adults, and Black patients. Only 20% of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease received SGLT-2 inhibitors, with prescribing rates declining in older age groups. NICE estimates that wider use of SGLT-2 inhibitors could save nearly 22,000 lives once uptake reaches 90%. Earlier Access to GLP-1 Agonists The draft guidance also recommends earlier use of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists such as liraglutide or semaglutide. These drugs, previously reserved for later stages of disease, would be considered earlier in treatment for selected groups. NICE further supports wider adoption of digital health tools, including continuous glucose monitoring and community-based digital care. Personalised Treatment Approaches The guidance proposes tailored treatment strategies based on patient characteristics and comorbidities: Adults with cardiovascular disease should receive triple therapy (metformin, an SGLT-2 inhibitor, and a GLP-1 receptor agonist) Those with early-onset T2D (diagnosed before age 40) should receive dual therapy before considering a GLP-1 receptor agonist Patients with obesity or chronic kidney disease should have specific combinations based on their condition and kidney function, respectively. Adults with clinical frailty should start with metformin monotherapy. Professor Jonathan Benger, deputy chief executive and chief medical officer at NICE, said the draft guidance marks a 'significant evolution' in diabetes care. 'The evidence shows that certain medicines can provide important cardiovascular benefits, and by recommending them as part of initial treatment, we could help prevent heart attacks, strokes, and other serious complications before they occur,' he said. Burden of Diabetes in the UK Approximately 4.6 million people in the UK have diabetes, with 90% diagnosed with T2D. Diabetes UK estimates that a further 1.3 million may be undiagnosed. The condition costs the NHS £1 million per hour, with 60% of spending linked to complications. Each week, diabetes contributes to more than 930 strokes, 660 heart attacks, and nearly 2990 cases of heart failure. Douglas Twenefour, head of clinical at Diabetes UK, welcomed the draft guidance. 'The majority of people with T2D are not currently taking the most effective medication for them, putting them at risk of devastating diabetes-related complications,' he said. 'Tailoring treatment based on individual risk could protect thousands against heart attacks and kidney disease.' Waqaar Shah, a GP partner at Chatfield Health Care in London and chair of the NICE guideline committee, said that these recommendations 'could help reduce health inequalities while providing better outcomes for everyone'. Implementation and Safety The draft guidance remains open for public consultation until 2 October. NICE will review feedback before publishing final recommendations. The guidance aims to promote equitable access to recommended therapies, supported by local training initiatives. Healthcare professionals have also stressed the need for safe prescribing of SGLT-2 inhibitors, which carry risks including diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Before starting treatment, providers should assess whether patients have previously experienced DKA, have acute illness, or follow very low-carbohydrate or ketogenic diets.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Moms Need to Give MAHA a Taste of Its Own Medicine
When Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of health and human services, offered an opening statement during his confirmation hearing in January, a gaggle of supportive moms sat behind him. Some of these women wore branded MAHA T-shirts, and many others had satisfied grins. In his speech that day, Kennedy called this army of mothers in his Make America Healthy Again movement 'one of the most powerful and transcendent' groups he's ever seen. Kennedy innately understands that Americans place a kind of halo on mothers when it comes to the nation's health, and he uses that to bolster his message. And mothers who care about children need to wrest this moral authority away from him. While the number of self-proclaimed 'MAHA moms' is difficult to quantify, they certainly have an influential social media and podcasting presence and a direct line to health policymakers. In March The Wall Street Journal described a 'closed-door MAHA moms Roundtable' with cabinet members and other Trump administration officials where the agenda included 'food additives, infant formula and screen time.' One of the bitter ironies of the MAHA moms is that they champion some policies that could have broader support among people who don't support Kennedy or this administration. I bet I agree with 75 percent of what was said in those closed-door meetings about food additives and screen time. Yet those aren't the areas where they've had much success. A draft of the 'Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy,' a White House report on children's health that was leaked last week, stops 'short of proposing direct restrictions on ultraprocessed foods and pesticides,' according to my newsroom colleagues. Many in the MAHA movement reacted with profound disappointment to the toothless recommendations. Moms Across America, one of the highest-profile MAHA grass-roots groups, described the vague single-sentence approach to pesticides in the report as 'beyond laughable. It's an embarrassment. It's an insult to the intelligence of the American people. A stalling tactic with dangerous and deadly results.' In contrast, vaccine skepticism — Kennedy's long-term pet cause — is where MAHA has already been able to cause irrevocable damage. In just six months, Kennedy fired all the expert members of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and canceled almost $500 million in mRNA vaccine research, and he may alter the federal vaccine court in a way that could cause some Americans to lose access to certain immunizations. The 'Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy' suggests that the administration will focus on vaccine injuries — which are mentioned multiple times in the draft, even though they are rare — rather than ensuring access to lifesaving inoculations. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
