Who really benefits when a wound care practice is owned by investors instead of physicians?
In this article, we’ll explore why a physician-owned model isn’t just better for patients. It’s also the most cost-effective approach to advanced wound care.
My name is Dr. Chris Mason. I’m a physician, but that’s not my only title. I’m also the founder, sole owner, President, and CEO of Rebirth Advanced Healing. I’ve spent my career in the world of emergency medicine and advanced wound care, and I’ve seen a trend that concerns me.
More and more, wound care medical practices are being bought and run by business people, private equity and venture capital groups; non-physicians. They’re driven by financial targets. They answer to investors. The result? The patient gets lost in the spreadsheet.
I built this practice on a different belief: when you focus everything on healing the patient, cost-effectiveness isn’t a target you aim for; it’s the natural outcome.
What Does “Physician-Owned” Actually Mean?
In simple terms, it means the buck stops with a doctor. In this case, it stops with me. As the sole owner, I am responsible for every clinical and business decision we make.
This is worlds away from an investor-owned model. There, the company answers to a board or a firm whose primary legal duty is to maximize profit for shareholders, often on a tight schedule.
That creates two fundamentally different questions at the heart of every choice.
- My question is always, “What is the best way to heal this patient?”
- Their question has to be, “What provides the best return for our investors?”
That single difference changes everything. It dictates the treatments we choose, the clinical decisions we make, the way we coordinate care, and ultimately, the final cost.
Where Does Money Really Go in Wound Care?
Let’s be blunt about the two things that make wound care so expensive: using pricey products when they aren’t needed, and complications that drag out treatment for months.
Advanced wound care has some incredible tools, like cellular products and skin substitutes. They can also be incredibly expensive. Our clinicians reach for an advanced treatment when it’s the right tool for the job.
An investor-backed model, however, can create pressure (spoken or unspoken) to use that same expensive product because it brings in the highest payment. It’s a subtle shift, but it has massive consequences for the final bill.
My clinicians are free from that pressure. Their only incentive is to heal the patient. Period. That freedom is the single greatest cost-control measure we have.
Better outcomes are less expensive.
Think about it. The faster a wound heals, the lower the total cost. It’s that simple. Fewer appointments mean fewer co-pays. It means less time away from work and family. It means a lower total bill for the insurance provider.
The same is true for complications. An infection or a setback can lead to a hospital stay, which is a catastrophic event for a patient’s health and their finances. Our obsession with clinical best practices isn’t just about good medicine; it’s about preventing these costly disasters.
You might ask, is there hard data that proves a physician-owned practice has better outcomes? While large-scale studies on this specific topic are still emerging, we are radically transparent with our own data.
For example, we track our wound improvement rates and complication rates relentlessly, not for a report, but because it’s how we get better. We also share that data with the world:
We know that better care always costs less in the long run.
The view from the CEO’s chair.
When I look at a business decision, I look at it as a physician.
Let’s say we’re considering buying a new diagnostic tool. The first question I ask is, “Will this help us heal wounds faster or prevent complications?” The cost is a factor, of course, but it comes second to the clinical benefit. For me, the return on investment is a healthier patient.
A CEO answering to a board or shareholders has to ask, “What is the financial ROI on this machine?” If it won’t pay for itself in two years, the answer is probably no, even if it’s the right thing to do for patients. We can choose to invest heavily in training our team on a technique that is highly effective but has a lower profit margin. That decision is a no-brainer for me. It might be a non-starter for them.
Why Our Approach Works: Clinically and Financially
So, does this model actually save patients money? Yes. It means fewer out-of-pocket costs because the course of care is shorter. For payers like Medicare, it means a lower total spend because we avoid waste and prevent expensive complications.
We have a straightforward process to ensure this. We don’t default to the most expensive treatment. We start with proven, evidence-based care. Our clinicians only use advanced products when a patient’s wound meets specific medical criteria. And our clinical leaders regularly review treatment plans to ensure that standard is being met. It’s a simple safeguard that protects the patient’s health and their wallet.
The most cost-effective medical care is simply the medical care that works best. My focus, and the focus of this entire practice, is on one thing: healing the patient.
Everything else is just a result of getting that right.
