What Do You Think About Physician Noncompete Agreements?

Why It Matters

Understanding how non‑competes affect physician movement directly influences patient access, talent distribution, and future policy direction in the health‑care sector.

Key Takeaways

• Debate over noncompetes' impact on clinician mobility
• FTC targets unreasonable restraints, not broad ban
• Medical Economics launches physician survey on noncompete effects
• Survey data to guide workforce and employment strategies
• Outcomes may influence future policy and contract practices

Pulse Analysis

The use of non‑compete clauses in physician contracts has long been a double‑edged sword. Health systems argue they safeguard investments in specialized equipment and patient panels, while clinicians warn they can trap doctors in low‑pay environments and disrupt continuity of care. Recent high‑profile lawsuits and state‑level bans have amplified scrutiny, prompting industry leaders to reassess the balance between protecting business interests and preserving a fluid talent market.

At the federal level, the FTC has clarified its enforcement posture. Rather than resurrecting a blanket prohibition on most non‑competes, the agency will focus on agreements that unreasonably restrict a physician’s ability to find new work. This nuanced approach reflects broader antitrust concerns about labor market rigidity while acknowledging the unique dynamics of health‑care delivery. Stakeholders should monitor FTC guidance closely, as enforcement actions could set precedents that reshape contract drafting across hospitals and private practices.

In response to the ongoing debate, Medical Economics is gathering real‑world data through an anonymous physician survey. By cataloguing perceived benefits, harms, and the contractual drivers behind non‑competes, the survey seeks to illuminate how these clauses influence workforce dynamics, patient outcomes, and organizational hiring strategies. The insights generated may inform future regulatory proposals, guide health‑system employment policies, and help physicians negotiate more balanced agreements. For executives and clinicians alike, staying informed about survey findings will be crucial for navigating an evolving legal and market landscape.

What do you think about physician noncompete agreements?

By Richard Payerchin · February 13 2026 · Fact‑checked by: Keith A. Reynolds, Cheney Gazzam Baltz

Key Takeaways

• Ongoing debate centers on whether physician noncompetes appropriately protect practice interests or inappropriately constrain clinician mobility and continuity of care.

• FTC enforcement is positioned to focus on “unreasonable” restraints rather than advancing a renewed broad federal prohibition on most noncompetes.

• An anonymous survey is collecting physician‑reported outcomes associated with noncompete clauses, including perceived benefits, harms, and contract drivers.

• Responses aim to inform how restrictive covenants may influence workforce dynamics, care delivery and organizational employment strategies.

---

For years, physicians, other clinicians and health‑care administrators have debated the appropriate use of noncompete clauses and agreements in work contracts.

This year, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) leaders explained the agency’s approach toward noncompetes. The FTC won’t propose another national ban on almost all noncompetes, but will take action against unreasonable agreements that limit people’s ability to find work.

Medical Economics wants to learn more about your experiences with noncompetes—the good and the bad. This survey has questions about those contract clauses and why they could help or harm health care by dealing with employment agreements for physicians.

You can take the anonymous survey here.