ID · Economics
Infectious disease is a cognitive specialty operating inside a payment system built around procedures. This section explains how ID practices actually assemble revenue — and why the models borrowed from other specialties consistently mis-describe it.
The revenue problem
Work RVUs capture billed encounters. A large share of what ID delivers is not a billed encounter.
Antimicrobial stewardship, infection prevention, curbside consultation, OPAT coordination and diagnostic stewardship are core ID outputs that generate little or no measured productivity. Several of them actively reduce measured revenue elsewhere in the institution — which is precisely why they are valuable.
National surveys have repeatedly placed ID among the lowest-compensated specialties, with among the lowest reported satisfaction with compensation, alongside a decade of unfilled fellowship positions. Policy researchers have examined targeted payment adjustments as a response to the resulting workforce shortage.
For an independent practice, the implication is concrete: a revenue model that relies on clinical billing alone is starting from a premise the payment system does not support. The viable models combine clinical revenue, contracted institutional services and an ancillary infusion business, each priced separately.
Worth holding on to
Sources & further reading
Hospital vs office
The most under-priced asset in most ID practices is the set of institutional obligations absorbed one favour at a time.
Hospitals are required to maintain antimicrobial stewardship and infection prevention capability with named physician leadership. That is a compliance obligation, not a preference — the institution needs qualified ID physicians. Yet stewardship leadership, infection prevention work, educational obligations and call coverage are routinely provided without a corresponding agreement.
The remedy begins with measurement. Log the hours by category over a representative period; an unquantified claim cannot be priced. Then separate the streams — medical directorship, stewardship leadership, coverage availability, and clinical consultation — into distinct agreements with defined scope and a review mechanism.
Worth holding on to
Group economics
Once an ID group runs an infusion business, income distribution stops being a simple productivity split.
Clinical revenue is broadly attributable to the physician who produced it. Ancillary contribution is produced by capital, staff and shared infrastructure — which means distributing it purely on clinical productivity rewards the wrong thing, and distributing it purely on ownership can demotivate the clinical work that feeds it.
Published accounts of established private ID practice describe substantially above-average compensation, with a marked difference between employed and partner outcomes — which is, in essence, a description of how ancillary and ownership economics accrue over time. Groups should decide deliberately how that value is shared, and write it down before it exists rather than after.
Worth holding on to
Benchmarks
Benchmark definitions built around procedural specialties describe ID poorly.
Sample composition matters enormously here: an ID benchmark drawn largely from hospital-employed physicians describes a different economic entity from an independent group running an infusion business. Definitions matter too — whether contracted service revenue is included in 'compensation' changes the number substantially.
Use benchmarks to generate questions about why you differ, then answer them from your own data. Never adopt one as a target without understanding what population produced it.
Worth holding on to
Benchmarks
This is the structure of the benchmark set, with definitions — not the values. We do not publish figures we have not licensed and verified.
Deliberately empty. The value column stays blank until we have licensed benchmark data with a stated source, sample definition and vintage. Publishing plausible-looking numbers would be worse than publishing none.
| Metric | Why it matters & how to define it | Median |
|---|---|---|
| Days in A/R | Longer in drug-heavy practice because high-value claims attract more review. Define gross versus net before comparing. | Pending data |
| A/R over 90 days (%) | Where authorisation and drug-claim problems accumulate first. | Pending data |
| Denial rate — dollars | Count-based denial rate materially understates infusion practice exposure. | Pending data |
| Hard-denial dollars on drug claims | In buy-and-bill this is realised inventory loss, not deferred revenue. | Pending data |
| Net collection rate | Collected against entitled — the summary measure of the whole cycle. | Pending data |
| Payment variance vs contracted rate | Underpayment detection on drug claims. Requires loaded fee schedules. | Pending data |
| Median referral to first dose | Clinical quality and financial control in a single interval. Report the 90th percentile too. | Pending data |
| Coordination hours per OPAT course | The uncompensated work, quantified — the basis of any institutional support argument. | Pending data |
| Contribution per course by site of care | The number that should drive site-of-care strategy alongside clinical suitability. | Pending data |
ID is a cognitive specialty with no procedural floor. Independent practice works when the revenue model is designed deliberately — consults, coverage contracts, outpatient clinic and an infusion or OPAT business, each priced separately.
15 min readRead
In drug-heavy ID work, prior authorization is not administrative overhead — it is the control that stands between a course of therapy and a written-off vial.
7 min readRead
Why a practice that dispenses expensive drugs is running a small pharmaceutical distribution business, and what that means for cash, risk and authorisation.
8 min readRead
