In Australia we have what is called a 'preferred provider' where the health funds give the patient a higher amount of refund provided the therapist agrees to take a lower amount of money for services provided. This is supposed to work as the health fund would recommend your practice via health fund advertising to increase patient numbers and increase overall income.
It is a restrictive trade practise and not recommended by the Australian Physiotherapy Association. Apparently similar schemes started in the U.S.A. Once most of the clinics signed up there was no advantage, so the health funds introduced a second tier premium refund system giving patients more refund if therapists agreed to charge even less. Such tactics are unsustainable as therapists eventually put lower experienced staff onto patients with these schemes and the patients end up paying more due to increased numbers of visits. The health fund monitors such increased treatment rates and then warns the clinic. Eventually it is a no win situation for everyone. The health insurers design these schemes dependent upon the laws in place where they operate.
It is necessary to fight back for our own survival as therapists and for ethical health care. Politicians need to be lobbied via patient and therapist feedback to show an overall decline in outcomes if such schemes continue to erode healthcare at high cost.
Just my opinion, for what it is worth.
MrPhysio+