在传统医疗中使用管理式医疗工具——我们应该这样做吗?我们可以吗?

Q2 Social Sciences Law and Contemporary Problems Pub Date : 2002-01-01 DOI:10.2307/1192282
R. Berenson, D. Harris
{"title":"在传统医疗中使用管理式医疗工具——我们应该这样做吗?我们可以吗?","authors":"R. Berenson, D. Harris","doi":"10.2307/1192282","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the early 1990s, policy analysts seeking important opportunities for reform in the Medicare program have looked at the experience of private markets and managed care in the private sector. Managed care organizations (“MCOs”), in general, and health maintenance organizations (“HMOs”), in particular, seem to have hit the wall in recent years in their ability to contain costs. They have experienced a public backlash against many of their policies and procedures, resulting in marketplace, legislative, and legal reactions that have altered their operations. Nevertheless, many policy analysts continue to look to managed care and competition among private health plans as the bases for structural reform of Medicare. Proponents of market forces in health care often advocate both managed care and managed competition, but, although related, the concepts are quite different. For purposes of this discussion, we apply the term “managed care” to supply-side interventions meant to affect directly the efficiency and quality of health services delivery. In contrast, “managed competition” attempts to alter individuals’ demand for care among competing private insurers, thereby affecting provider behavior only indirectly.","PeriodicalId":39484,"journal":{"name":"Law and Contemporary Problems","volume":"95 1","pages":"139-168"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Managed Care Tools in Traditional Medicare — Should We? Could We?\",\"authors\":\"R. Berenson, D. Harris\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/1192282\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since the early 1990s, policy analysts seeking important opportunities for reform in the Medicare program have looked at the experience of private markets and managed care in the private sector. Managed care organizations (“MCOs”), in general, and health maintenance organizations (“HMOs”), in particular, seem to have hit the wall in recent years in their ability to contain costs. They have experienced a public backlash against many of their policies and procedures, resulting in marketplace, legislative, and legal reactions that have altered their operations. Nevertheless, many policy analysts continue to look to managed care and competition among private health plans as the bases for structural reform of Medicare. Proponents of market forces in health care often advocate both managed care and managed competition, but, although related, the concepts are quite different. For purposes of this discussion, we apply the term “managed care” to supply-side interventions meant to affect directly the efficiency and quality of health services delivery. In contrast, “managed competition” attempts to alter individuals’ demand for care among competing private insurers, thereby affecting provider behavior only indirectly.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39484,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Contemporary Problems\",\"volume\":\"95 1\",\"pages\":\"139-168\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Contemporary Problems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/1192282\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Contemporary Problems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1192282","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

自20世纪90年代初以来,寻求医疗保险计划改革重要机会的政策分析人士一直在研究私营市场和私营部门管理式医疗的经验。总体而言,管理式医疗组织(mco),尤其是健康维护组织(hmo),近年来似乎在控制成本的能力方面遇到了瓶颈。他们经历了公众对他们的许多政策和程序的强烈反对,导致市场、立法和法律的反应改变了他们的运作。然而,许多政策分析人士继续把管理医疗和私人健康计划之间的竞争视为医疗保险结构改革的基础。医疗保健市场力量的支持者经常主张管理式医疗和管理式竞争,但是,尽管相关,概念是完全不同的。为了本讨论的目的,我们将术语“管理式医疗”应用于旨在直接影响卫生服务提供的效率和质量的供应方干预措施。相比之下,“有管理的竞争”试图改变相互竞争的私人保险公司之间的个人护理需求,从而仅间接影响提供者的行为。
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
Using Managed Care Tools in Traditional Medicare — Should We? Could We?
Since the early 1990s, policy analysts seeking important opportunities for reform in the Medicare program have looked at the experience of private markets and managed care in the private sector. Managed care organizations (“MCOs”), in general, and health maintenance organizations (“HMOs”), in particular, seem to have hit the wall in recent years in their ability to contain costs. They have experienced a public backlash against many of their policies and procedures, resulting in marketplace, legislative, and legal reactions that have altered their operations. Nevertheless, many policy analysts continue to look to managed care and competition among private health plans as the bases for structural reform of Medicare. Proponents of market forces in health care often advocate both managed care and managed competition, but, although related, the concepts are quite different. For purposes of this discussion, we apply the term “managed care” to supply-side interventions meant to affect directly the efficiency and quality of health services delivery. In contrast, “managed competition” attempts to alter individuals’ demand for care among competing private insurers, thereby affecting provider behavior only indirectly.
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
Law and Contemporary Problems
Law and Contemporary Problems Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: Law and Contemporary Problems was founded in 1933 and is the oldest journal published at Duke Law School. It is a quarterly, interdisciplinary, faculty-edited publication of Duke Law School. L&CP recognizes that many fields in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities can enhance the development and understanding of law. It is our purpose to seek out these areas of overlap and to publish balanced symposia that enlighten not just legal readers, but readers from these other disciplines as well. L&CP uses a symposium format, generally publishing one symposium per issue on a topic of contemporary concern. Authors and articles are selected to ensure that each issue collectively creates a unified presentation of the contemporary problem under consideration. L&CP hosts an annual conference at Duke Law School featuring the authors of one of the year’s four symposia.
期刊最新文献
The Influence of Re-Selection on Independent Decision Making in State Supreme Courts Voting Rights and the “Statutory Constitution” Challenging Gender in Single-Sex Spaces: Lessons from a Feminist Softball League Treaties and Human Rights: The Role of Long-Term Trends Correcting Federalism Mistakes in Statutory Interpretation: The Supreme Court and the Federal Arbitration Act
×
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