在简报里……

S. Mullane, S. Rydell, M. Larouche, M. Toledo, L. Feltes, Brenna Vuong, Noe Crespo, G. Gaesser, P. Estabrooks, Mark A Pereira, M. Buman, Banh, Jeremy Chaikind, Hillary A. Robertson, Mary Troxel, J. Achille, C. Egan, B. Anthony
{"title":"在简报里……","authors":"S. Mullane, S. Rydell, M. Larouche, M. Toledo, L. Feltes, Brenna Vuong, Noe Crespo, G. Gaesser, P. Estabrooks, Mark A Pereira, M. Buman, Banh, Jeremy Chaikind, Hillary A. Robertson, Mary Troxel, J. Achille, C. Egan, B. Anthony","doi":"10.1177/0890117119825690","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Paul E. Terry 166 Editorial Incentives, Mandates and Taxes: When Doing More Equates to Learning More A recent District Court decision held that the Affordable Care Act (ACA), absent a tax penalty relating to the individual mandate, was unconstitutional. This follows on a Circuit Court decision that the ACA wellness provisions should be nullified. This editorial reviews the similarities and differences between the rulings and asks if a reasonable person would believe that offering financial incentives aimed at supporting a modicum of effort at self-care is rational. One survey of employers and health care consumers indicates 91 percent of those surveyed agree that wellness programs are a perk that helps employees improve health and, interestingly, the same percent agree these programs are sponsored by employers to cut costs. Where some may view the cost containment objectives of employee wellness as dubious, it’s a minority view. Still, some minorities should and do carry inordinate sway in public health such as the small percent of those living with chronic conditions who are unwilling to participate in a healthy living program that is associated with their receiving full benefits. Are incentives a worthwhile strategy if they fail to motivate those who would benefit most from health improvement?","PeriodicalId":13728,"journal":{"name":"Inpharma Weekly","volume":"38 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In briefs …\",\"authors\":\"S. Mullane, S. Rydell, M. Larouche, M. Toledo, L. Feltes, Brenna Vuong, Noe Crespo, G. Gaesser, P. Estabrooks, Mark A Pereira, M. Buman, Banh, Jeremy Chaikind, Hillary A. Robertson, Mary Troxel, J. Achille, C. Egan, B. Anthony\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0890117119825690\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Paul E. Terry 166 Editorial Incentives, Mandates and Taxes: When Doing More Equates to Learning More A recent District Court decision held that the Affordable Care Act (ACA), absent a tax penalty relating to the individual mandate, was unconstitutional. This follows on a Circuit Court decision that the ACA wellness provisions should be nullified. This editorial reviews the similarities and differences between the rulings and asks if a reasonable person would believe that offering financial incentives aimed at supporting a modicum of effort at self-care is rational. One survey of employers and health care consumers indicates 91 percent of those surveyed agree that wellness programs are a perk that helps employees improve health and, interestingly, the same percent agree these programs are sponsored by employers to cut costs. Where some may view the cost containment objectives of employee wellness as dubious, it’s a minority view. Still, some minorities should and do carry inordinate sway in public health such as the small percent of those living with chronic conditions who are unwilling to participate in a healthy living program that is associated with their receiving full benefits. Are incentives a worthwhile strategy if they fail to motivate those who would benefit most from health improvement?\",\"PeriodicalId\":13728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Inpharma Weekly\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Inpharma Weekly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117119825690\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inpharma Weekly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117119825690","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

激励、强制和税收:当做得更多等同于学得更多时,最近的一项地方法院裁决认为,《平价医疗法案》(ACA)没有与个人强制相关的税收处罚,是违宪的。在此之前,巡回法院裁定ACA的健康条款应该无效。这篇社论回顾了两项裁决之间的异同,并询问一个理性的人是否会相信,提供旨在支持一点点自我保健努力的经济激励是理性的。一项针对雇主和医疗保健消费者的调查显示,91%的受访者认为健康计划是一种福利,可以帮助员工改善健康状况,有趣的是,同样比例的人认为这些计划是雇主为了削减成本而赞助的。有些人可能认为员工健康的成本控制目标是可疑的,这是少数人的观点。尽管如此,一些少数群体应该而且确实在公共卫生方面发挥着巨大的影响,比如一小部分患有慢性病的人,他们不愿意参加与他们获得全额福利相关的健康生活计划。如果激励措施不能激励那些将从健康改善中获益最多的人,那么激励措施是一种有价值的策略吗?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
In briefs …
Paul E. Terry 166 Editorial Incentives, Mandates and Taxes: When Doing More Equates to Learning More A recent District Court decision held that the Affordable Care Act (ACA), absent a tax penalty relating to the individual mandate, was unconstitutional. This follows on a Circuit Court decision that the ACA wellness provisions should be nullified. This editorial reviews the similarities and differences between the rulings and asks if a reasonable person would believe that offering financial incentives aimed at supporting a modicum of effort at self-care is rational. One survey of employers and health care consumers indicates 91 percent of those surveyed agree that wellness programs are a perk that helps employees improve health and, interestingly, the same percent agree these programs are sponsored by employers to cut costs. Where some may view the cost containment objectives of employee wellness as dubious, it’s a minority view. Still, some minorities should and do carry inordinate sway in public health such as the small percent of those living with chronic conditions who are unwilling to participate in a healthy living program that is associated with their receiving full benefits. Are incentives a worthwhile strategy if they fail to motivate those who would benefit most from health improvement?
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
A word of caution In brief … The power of two BCG vaccine From the Editor
×
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