A technology anthology. Recent writings and remarks on the state of the state-of-the-art.

Health systems review Pub Date : 1997-03-01
{"title":"A technology anthology. Recent writings and remarks on the state of the state-of-the-art.","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Early this year, the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) backed down from plans to publish a final regulation governing the criteria for coverage of medical technologies in the Medicare program. Originally drafted in 1989, the rules spawned an eight-year controversy, largely because they proposed making \"cost-effectiveness\" one factor in deciding whether certain procedures would be reimbursed. It was one of the first attempts to articulate the precise role cost-effectiveness should play in coverage policy in either the public or private sectors. Many groups opposed the introduction of cost-effectiveness into the equation, but none so actively as medical device manufacturers, represented by the Health Industry Manufacturers Association (HIMA). Following are excerpts from their exchanges, beginning with HCFA's proposed rule in January of 1989.</p>","PeriodicalId":79615,"journal":{"name":"Health systems review","volume":"30 2","pages":"58, 60, 62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health systems review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Early this year, the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) backed down from plans to publish a final regulation governing the criteria for coverage of medical technologies in the Medicare program. Originally drafted in 1989, the rules spawned an eight-year controversy, largely because they proposed making "cost-effectiveness" one factor in deciding whether certain procedures would be reimbursed. It was one of the first attempts to articulate the precise role cost-effectiveness should play in coverage policy in either the public or private sectors. Many groups opposed the introduction of cost-effectiveness into the equation, but none so actively as medical device manufacturers, represented by the Health Industry Manufacturers Association (HIMA). Following are excerpts from their exchanges, beginning with HCFA's proposed rule in January of 1989.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一本技术选集。最新的关于最新技术的著作和评论。
今年早些时候,美国医疗融资管理局(HCFA)放弃了公布最终法规的计划,该法规规定了医疗技术在医疗保险计划中的覆盖标准。这些规定最初起草于1989年,引发了长达8年的争议,主要是因为它们提议将“成本效益”作为决定是否报销某些手术的一个因素。这是阐明成本效益在公共或私营部门的覆盖政策中应发挥的确切作用的首批尝试之一。许多团体反对将成本效益纳入考虑范围,但没有一个团体像以卫生产业制造商协会(HIMA)为代表的医疗设备制造商那样积极。以下是他们交流的节选,从1989年1月HCFA提出的规则开始。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The best defense.... Dealmaking. Back to basics. Arkansas--going it alone. Texas--the new accountability. Redefining health care delivery through partnerships.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1