>>That is patently, 100% false.

Reality check: you're a MVP in SQL Server, not healthcare admin.

Firstly, the Physicians Foundation promotes healthcare reform as a key component of its work. In this context: the question asked in the survey is to rate the ACA as a vehicle for healthcare reform. It's not a generalized rating as to whether the ACA is any good, which is how you seem to interpret it.

Secondly, physicians have panned healthcare funding models in every survey I can remember, ever. This time it's the ACA and the survey question obviously begs the question that reform is needed- iow an indictment of the prior status quo. The ACA did not arrive on planet earth and cause physician displeasure: it inherited it.

If you dig into the raw data you see higher positivity amongst young, female and employed physicians compared to old-school self-employed male and specialist physicians who have decades of disenchantment behind them. Note that more more and more physicians are going for employment - only 35% self-employed in 2014 compared to 48% in 2012. The next survey will ask why, but anecdotally this is driven by a desire for more flexible hours and to be insulated from admin and paperwork. So employment status needs to be read into answers to Q19 and 20 and certainly the predictable trend is positive for the ACA. Focus only on one badly paraphrased piece and you miss all this.

Also note the response re ICD-10 and 34 re Electronic Health Records: does this mean ICD-10 and EHRs are failures too?

There are numerous stressors for physicians, but providing enough physicians for the aging population and newly insured ought to be a (the?) major take home message here. The US is said to have 20,000 fewer physicians than it needs, set to increase to >100,000 too few in the next decade. Result: in 2014, only 19% of MD respondents are able to take new patients compared to 25% in 2012.

Other reviewers focus on 44% of respondents saying they intend career changes to reduce workload and stress, including retiring, closing the books, taking on non-clinical responsibilities or reducing their hours. However, this is lower than in 2012 with more physicians now saying they intend to continue as they are. That could be down to reduced hours in 2014 (average 57 hours/week in 2008, down to 53 hours in 2014) and changed employment status as above. Certainly reduction of hours is an international trend.

The most likely result from the visible changes will be additional responsibilities for other sorts of practitioners which always increases costs to the dismay of those who like to claim physicians are paid too much. FWIW I was right there watching one example where other practitioners were given additional responsibilities by politicos who thought their solution was oh-so-clever. Cost quadrupled and by the time another genius came up with the idea of luring physicians back, skills were rusty and there was no rational way to rebuild physician presence. So service remains less available and far more expensive to this day. People need to be careful what they wish for.

And even despite all this - US physicians still report better morale in 2014. IOW the ACA may not be the best vehicle for reform from a physician pov- but the sky is blue and hasn't fallen yet.