Sudha Xirasagar, Carleen H Stoskopf, William R Shrader, Saundra H Glover
{"title":"国家小集团市场改革在准入和提高价值计划特征上的比较快照,1999。","authors":"Sudha Xirasagar, Carleen H Stoskopf, William R Shrader, Saundra H Glover","doi":"10.1300/j045v19n03_05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Small group health insurance statutes of 48 states and the District of Columbia, as of 1999, were reviewed. Reform provisions judged to have some relevance for the market are catalogued and total 74 distinct regulations. Judgment of market relevance was based on actuarial experience at a leading health insurance company. The regulations are categorized under: (1) Access improvement; (2) Pricing and Rating Reforms; (3) Improving stability of coverage; and (4) Improving valued features of plans. The nuances and variety of these regulations, adopted in various combinations by the states, are discussed. The complexity of the reform scenario suggests the need for impact studies that take into account the totality of reform. Past studies have evaluated the impact of selected major reforms in isolation, and, thus, have been inadequate to provide definitive conclusions on the reforms' impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":73764,"journal":{"name":"Journal of health & social policy","volume":"19 3","pages":"67-90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1300/j045v19n03_05","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison snapshot of states' small group market reform on access and enhancing valued plan features, 1999.\",\"authors\":\"Sudha Xirasagar, Carleen H Stoskopf, William R Shrader, Saundra H Glover\",\"doi\":\"10.1300/j045v19n03_05\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Small group health insurance statutes of 48 states and the District of Columbia, as of 1999, were reviewed. Reform provisions judged to have some relevance for the market are catalogued and total 74 distinct regulations. Judgment of market relevance was based on actuarial experience at a leading health insurance company. The regulations are categorized under: (1) Access improvement; (2) Pricing and Rating Reforms; (3) Improving stability of coverage; and (4) Improving valued features of plans. The nuances and variety of these regulations, adopted in various combinations by the states, are discussed. The complexity of the reform scenario suggests the need for impact studies that take into account the totality of reform. Past studies have evaluated the impact of selected major reforms in isolation, and, thus, have been inadequate to provide definitive conclusions on the reforms' impact.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73764,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of health & social policy\",\"volume\":\"19 3\",\"pages\":\"67-90\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1300/j045v19n03_05\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of health & social policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1300/j045v19n03_05\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of health & social policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1300/j045v19n03_05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparison snapshot of states' small group market reform on access and enhancing valued plan features, 1999.
Small group health insurance statutes of 48 states and the District of Columbia, as of 1999, were reviewed. Reform provisions judged to have some relevance for the market are catalogued and total 74 distinct regulations. Judgment of market relevance was based on actuarial experience at a leading health insurance company. The regulations are categorized under: (1) Access improvement; (2) Pricing and Rating Reforms; (3) Improving stability of coverage; and (4) Improving valued features of plans. The nuances and variety of these regulations, adopted in various combinations by the states, are discussed. The complexity of the reform scenario suggests the need for impact studies that take into account the totality of reform. Past studies have evaluated the impact of selected major reforms in isolation, and, thus, have been inadequate to provide definitive conclusions on the reforms' impact.