有效竞争的法律框架。

The Baxter health policy review Pub Date : 1996-01-01
R A Berenson, D A Hastings, W G Kopit
{"title":"有效竞争的法律框架。","authors":"R A Berenson,&nbsp;D A Hastings,&nbsp;W G Kopit","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Largely because of its indifference to spiraling costs, the professional domination model is being replaced by a market model based on competition among managed care plans and integrated delivery systems. In general, the more fully integrated previously competing providers become--for instance, by assuming financial risk together--the less legal risk is present, because of a decreased possibility of improper conspiratorial or collective behavior. Nevertheless, provider joint ventures and integrated delivery systems face a complex interaction of practical challenges and various legal and regulatory risks. This chapter explores ways in which laws involving fraud and abuse, self-referral, private inurement, corporate practice of medicine, Medicare reimbursement policy, and antitrust enforcement affect typical integrated delivery systems. From a legal standpoint, it might seem logical that the laws regulating health care providers would support and promote integration. A permissive legal environment to foster development of an integrated service network model assumes its development in a delivery system in which networks are at financial risk for the services provided. However, many of the laws and regulations governing integrated provider development were established at a time when joint ventures and other alliances were organizing in a predominantly fee-for-service environment and were generating significant increases in health care costs without producing demonstrable efficiencies or quality enhancements. The results is a fundamental inconsistency in government policy. The demand for collaboration by purchasers and legislatures does not necessarily cause the vast body of health care regulators to revise their concerns that many of the very collaborative activities being encouraged trigger potentially illegal acts and relationships. In a market model, the application of federal and state antitrust laws is especially important. In 1993 and 1994, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission jointly issued \"Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy\" in a number of areas of provider uncertainty. For integrated delivery systems, the primary focus of antitrust analysis is \"market power.\" Systems without market power (i.e., the ability to force a purchaser to do something that the purchaser would not do in a competitive market) cannot harm consumers and should be free from serious antitrust risk. Where a network may have market power, its activities may be limited only if demonstrable anticompetitive effects outweigh the benefits of the efficiencies claimed by the new arrangement. The chapter concludes that vigorous antitrust enforcement may be required to promote market competition among integrated networks of providers and the managed care plans they serve.</p>","PeriodicalId":80306,"journal":{"name":"The Baxter health policy review","volume":"2 ","pages":"235-65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The legal framework for effective competition.\",\"authors\":\"R A Berenson,&nbsp;D A Hastings,&nbsp;W G Kopit\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Largely because of its indifference to spiraling costs, the professional domination model is being replaced by a market model based on competition among managed care plans and integrated delivery systems. In general, the more fully integrated previously competing providers become--for instance, by assuming financial risk together--the less legal risk is present, because of a decreased possibility of improper conspiratorial or collective behavior. Nevertheless, provider joint ventures and integrated delivery systems face a complex interaction of practical challenges and various legal and regulatory risks. This chapter explores ways in which laws involving fraud and abuse, self-referral, private inurement, corporate practice of medicine, Medicare reimbursement policy, and antitrust enforcement affect typical integrated delivery systems. From a legal standpoint, it might seem logical that the laws regulating health care providers would support and promote integration. A permissive legal environment to foster development of an integrated service network model assumes its development in a delivery system in which networks are at financial risk for the services provided. However, many of the laws and regulations governing integrated provider development were established at a time when joint ventures and other alliances were organizing in a predominantly fee-for-service environment and were generating significant increases in health care costs without producing demonstrable efficiencies or quality enhancements. The results is a fundamental inconsistency in government policy. The demand for collaboration by purchasers and legislatures does not necessarily cause the vast body of health care regulators to revise their concerns that many of the very collaborative activities being encouraged trigger potentially illegal acts and relationships. In a market model, the application of federal and state antitrust laws is especially important. In 1993 and 1994, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission jointly issued \\\"Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy\\\" in a number of areas of provider uncertainty. For integrated delivery systems, the primary focus of antitrust analysis is \\\"market power.\\\" Systems without market power (i.e., the ability to force a purchaser to do something that the purchaser would not do in a competitive market) cannot harm consumers and should be free from serious antitrust risk. Where a network may have market power, its activities may be limited only if demonstrable anticompetitive effects outweigh the benefits of the efficiencies claimed by the new arrangement. The chapter concludes that vigorous antitrust enforcement may be required to promote market competition among integrated networks of providers and the managed care plans they serve.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":80306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Baxter health policy review\",\"volume\":\"2 \",\"pages\":\"235-65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1996-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Baxter health policy review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Baxter health policy 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

摘要

由于对不断上升的成本漠不关心,专业主导模式正在被基于管理式医疗计划和综合交付系统之间竞争的市场模式所取代。一般来说,以前相互竞争的供应商越充分整合——例如,通过共同承担金融风险——存在的法律风险就越小,因为不正当阴谋或集体行为的可能性降低了。然而,供应商合资企业和综合交付系统面临着实际挑战和各种法律和监管风险的复杂相互作用。本章探讨了涉及欺诈和滥用、自我转诊、私人保险、医药企业实践、医疗保险报销政策和反垄断执法的法律如何影响典型的综合交付系统。从法律的角度来看,监管卫生保健提供者的法律支持和促进一体化似乎是合乎逻辑的。促进综合服务网络模式发展的宽松法律环境假定其发展是在一种交付系统中进行的,在这种交付系统中,网络所提供的服务面临财务风险。然而,管理综合提供者发展的许多法律和条例是在合资企业和其他联盟在主要是按服务收费的环境中组织起来的时候制定的,这些企业和联盟造成了保健费用的大幅增加,却没有产生明显的效率或质量提高。其结果是政府政策的根本不一致。购买者和立法机构对合作的要求并不一定会使大量卫生保健监管机构改变他们的担忧,即许多被鼓励的非常合作的活动可能引发非法行为和关系。在市场模型中,联邦和州反垄断法的适用尤为重要。1993年和1994年,司法部和联邦贸易委员会在供应商不确定的一些领域联合发布了“反垄断执行政策声明”。对于综合配送系统,反垄断分析的主要焦点是“市场力量”。没有市场力量的系统(即,强迫购买者做购买者在竞争市场中不会做的事情的能力)不会损害消费者,应该没有严重的反垄断风险。当一个网络可能拥有市场力量时,只有当明显的反竞争影响超过新安排所声称的效率效益时,它的活动才可能受到限制。本章的结论是,可能需要强有力的反垄断执法,以促进供应商和他们所服务的管理式医疗计划的综合网络之间的市场竞争。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The legal framework for effective competition.

Largely because of its indifference to spiraling costs, the professional domination model is being replaced by a market model based on competition among managed care plans and integrated delivery systems. In general, the more fully integrated previously competing providers become--for instance, by assuming financial risk together--the less legal risk is present, because of a decreased possibility of improper conspiratorial or collective behavior. Nevertheless, provider joint ventures and integrated delivery systems face a complex interaction of practical challenges and various legal and regulatory risks. This chapter explores ways in which laws involving fraud and abuse, self-referral, private inurement, corporate practice of medicine, Medicare reimbursement policy, and antitrust enforcement affect typical integrated delivery systems. From a legal standpoint, it might seem logical that the laws regulating health care providers would support and promote integration. A permissive legal environment to foster development of an integrated service network model assumes its development in a delivery system in which networks are at financial risk for the services provided. However, many of the laws and regulations governing integrated provider development were established at a time when joint ventures and other alliances were organizing in a predominantly fee-for-service environment and were generating significant increases in health care costs without producing demonstrable efficiencies or quality enhancements. The results is a fundamental inconsistency in government policy. The demand for collaboration by purchasers and legislatures does not necessarily cause the vast body of health care regulators to revise their concerns that many of the very collaborative activities being encouraged trigger potentially illegal acts and relationships. In a market model, the application of federal and state antitrust laws is especially important. In 1993 and 1994, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission jointly issued "Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy" in a number of areas of provider uncertainty. For integrated delivery systems, the primary focus of antitrust analysis is "market power." Systems without market power (i.e., the ability to force a purchaser to do something that the purchaser would not do in a competitive market) cannot harm consumers and should be free from serious antitrust risk. Where a network may have market power, its activities may be limited only if demonstrable anticompetitive effects outweigh the benefits of the efficiencies claimed by the new arrangement. The chapter concludes that vigorous antitrust enforcement may be required to promote market competition among integrated networks of providers and the managed care plans they serve.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Where does health care reform go from here? An unchartered odyssey. Health care spending: can the United States control it? The new organization of the health care delivery system. Strategic issues for managing the future physician workforce. States and health care reform: the importance of program implementation.
×
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