医疗保健领域的需求证明法:文献综述

IF 1.8 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Matthew D. Mitchell
{"title":"医疗保健领域的需求证明法:文献综述","authors":"Matthew D. Mitchell","doi":"10.1002/soej.12698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Certificate‐of‐Need (CON) laws limit the supply of healthcare services in about two‐thirds of U.S. states. The regulations require those who wish to open or expand their facilities to first prove that their services are needed. Once encouraged by the federal government, Congress eliminated the inducement in the 1980s and since then several states have either pared their CON programs back or eliminated them altogether. To date, there have been 128 academic assessments of CON laws and together these papers contain over 450 tests. In this paper, I review this literature, organizing the results around the most common rationales for CON laws. The accumulated evidence is overwhelming that CON laws do not achieve their purpose. Instead, the balance of evidence suggests that these regulations increase spending, reduce access to care, undermine quality, and fail to ensure care for underserved populations.","PeriodicalId":47946,"journal":{"name":"Southern Economic Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Certificate‐of‐Need laws in healthcare: A comprehensive review of the literature\",\"authors\":\"Matthew D. Mitchell\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/soej.12698\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Certificate‐of‐Need (CON) laws limit the supply of healthcare services in about two‐thirds of U.S. states. The regulations require those who wish to open or expand their facilities to first prove that their services are needed. Once encouraged by the federal government, Congress eliminated the inducement in the 1980s and since then several states have either pared their CON programs back or eliminated them altogether. To date, there have been 128 academic assessments of CON laws and together these papers contain over 450 tests. In this paper, I review this literature, organizing the results around the most common rationales for CON laws. The accumulated evidence is overwhelming that CON laws do not achieve their purpose. Instead, the balance of evidence suggests that these regulations increase spending, reduce access to care, undermine quality, and fail to ensure care for underserved populations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47946,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Southern Economic Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Southern Economic Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12698\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Economic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12698","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在美国约三分之二的州,需求证明(CON)法限制了医疗服务的供应。这些法规要求那些希望开设或扩大其设施的人首先证明其服务是必需的。联邦政府曾一度鼓励这种做法,但美国国会在 20 世纪 80 年代取消了这一鼓励措施,此后,一些州要么缩减了 CON 计划,要么将其完全取消。迄今为止,学术界已对 CON 法律进行了 128 次评估,这些论文共包含 450 多项测试。在本文中,我回顾了这些文献,并围绕 CON 法律最常见的理由对结果进行了整理。积累的大量证据表明,CON 法并未实现其目的。相反,大量证据表明,这些法规增加了开支,减少了医疗服务的可及性,损害了医疗质量,并且无法确保为得不到充分服务的人群提供医疗服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Certificate‐of‐Need laws in healthcare: A comprehensive review of the literature
Certificate‐of‐Need (CON) laws limit the supply of healthcare services in about two‐thirds of U.S. states. The regulations require those who wish to open or expand their facilities to first prove that their services are needed. Once encouraged by the federal government, Congress eliminated the inducement in the 1980s and since then several states have either pared their CON programs back or eliminated them altogether. To date, there have been 128 academic assessments of CON laws and together these papers contain over 450 tests. In this paper, I review this literature, organizing the results around the most common rationales for CON laws. The accumulated evidence is overwhelming that CON laws do not achieve their purpose. Instead, the balance of evidence suggests that these regulations increase spending, reduce access to care, undermine quality, and fail to ensure care for underserved populations.
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
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
58
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信