The managed care backlash: perceptions and rhetoric in health care policy and the potential for health care reform.

David Mechanic
{"title":"The managed care backlash: perceptions and rhetoric in health care policy and the potential for health care reform.","authors":"David Mechanic","doi":"10.1111/1468-0009.00195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The focus on managed care and the managed care backlash divert attention from more important national health issues, such as insurance coverage and quality of care. The ongoing public debate often does not accurately convey the key issues or the relevant evidence. Important perceptions of reduced encounter time with physicians, limitations on physicians' ability to communicate options to patients, and blocked access to inpatient care, among others, are either incorrect or exaggerated. The public backlash reflects a lack of trust resulting from cost constraints, explicit rationing, and media coverage. Inevitable errors are now readily attributed to managed care practices and organizations. Some procedural consumer protections may help restore the eroding trust and refocus public discussion on more central issues.","PeriodicalId":78777,"journal":{"name":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly","volume":"29 1","pages":"35-54; 2 p preceding VI"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"94","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.00195","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 94

Abstract

The focus on managed care and the managed care backlash divert attention from more important national health issues, such as insurance coverage and quality of care. The ongoing public debate often does not accurately convey the key issues or the relevant evidence. Important perceptions of reduced encounter time with physicians, limitations on physicians' ability to communicate options to patients, and blocked access to inpatient care, among others, are either incorrect or exaggerated. The public backlash reflects a lack of trust resulting from cost constraints, explicit rationing, and media coverage. Inevitable errors are now readily attributed to managed care practices and organizations. Some procedural consumer protections may help restore the eroding trust and refocus public discussion on more central issues.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
管理医疗反弹:在卫生保健政策和卫生保健改革的潜力的看法和言论。
对管理式医疗的关注和管理式医疗的反弹转移了人们对更重要的国家卫生问题的关注,如保险覆盖面和医疗质量。正在进行的公众辩论往往不能准确地传达关键问题或相关证据。减少与医生的接触时间,限制医生与患者沟通选择的能力,以及阻碍住院治疗等重要观念要么是不正确的,要么是夸大的。公众的强烈反对反映了由于成本限制、明确的配给和媒体报道而导致的信任缺失。不可避免的错误现在很容易归因于管理式医疗实践和组织。一些程序性的消费者保护措施可能有助于恢复被侵蚀的信任,并将公众讨论的焦点重新集中在更核心的问题上。
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
Measurement of Nasal Mucociliary Clearance in Indian Adults: Normative Data. Acknowledgments. Acknowledgments In the December 2019 Issue of the Quarterly In the September 2019 Issue of the Quarterly.
×
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