从SCHIP福利设计到个人覆盖范围的决定。

Anne Markus, Sara Rosenbaum, Ruth E K Stein, Jill Joseph
{"title":"从SCHIP福利设计到个人覆盖范围的决定。","authors":"Anne Markus,&nbsp;Sara Rosenbaum,&nbsp;Ruth E K Stein,&nbsp;Jill Joseph","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The majority of states have implemented separate SCHIP (S-SCHIP) programs that significantly depart from Medicaid and resemble less comprehensive commercial products. This difference in program design may result in S-SCHIP potentially being less responsive to children with special needs (CSHCNs). This study explores how responsive insurers are to these higher than average needs. We found that, with one exception, insurers did not agree on the coverage of any specific service, but overall they provided coverage beyond state limits and exclusions. Second, the less acute the childhood condition, the more frequently insurers imposed exclusions. Finally, in the majority of states, some insurers excluded services that arguably should have been covered according to the plan/contract language. We conclude that SCHIP coverage at current levels may not be sufficient to care for CSHCNs, making external reviews of insurers' coverage decisions and coordination with other sources of care important components of SCHIP program design.</p>","PeriodicalId":83864,"journal":{"name":"Policy brief (George Washington University. Center for Health Services Research and Policy)","volume":" 6","pages":"1-24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From SCHIP benefit design to individual coverage decisions.\",\"authors\":\"Anne Markus,&nbsp;Sara Rosenbaum,&nbsp;Ruth E K Stein,&nbsp;Jill Joseph\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The majority of states have implemented separate SCHIP (S-SCHIP) programs that significantly depart from Medicaid and resemble less comprehensive commercial products. This difference in program design may result in S-SCHIP potentially being less responsive to children with special needs (CSHCNs). This study explores how responsive insurers are to these higher than average needs. We found that, with one exception, insurers did not agree on the coverage of any specific service, but overall they provided coverage beyond state limits and exclusions. Second, the less acute the childhood condition, the more frequently insurers imposed exclusions. Finally, in the majority of states, some insurers excluded services that arguably should have been covered according to the plan/contract language. We conclude that SCHIP coverage at current levels may not be sufficient to care for CSHCNs, making external reviews of insurers' coverage decisions and coordination with other sources of care important components of SCHIP program design.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":83864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy brief (George Washington University. Center for Health Services Research and Policy)\",\"volume\":\" 6\",\"pages\":\"1-24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy brief (George Washington University. Center for Health Services Research and Policy)\",\"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":"Policy brief (George Washington University. Center for Health Services Research and Policy)","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

大多数州已经实施了单独的SCHIP (S-SCHIP)计划,与医疗补助计划明显不同,类似于不太全面的商业产品。这种方案设计上的差异可能导致S-SCHIP对特殊需要儿童(CSHCNs)的潜在反应较差。本研究探讨了保险公司如何应对这些高于平均水平的需求。我们发现,除了一个例外,保险公司没有就任何特定服务的覆盖范围达成一致,但总的来说,他们提供的覆盖范围超出了州限制和除外范围。其次,儿童疾病越不严重,保险公司就越频繁地实施排除。最后,在大多数州,一些保险公司排除了根据计划/合同语言本应涵盖的服务。我们的结论是,目前的SCHIP覆盖水平可能不足以照顾CSHCNs,因此对保险公司的覆盖决策和与其他护理来源的协调进行外部审查是SCHIP项目设计的重要组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From SCHIP benefit design to individual coverage decisions.

The majority of states have implemented separate SCHIP (S-SCHIP) programs that significantly depart from Medicaid and resemble less comprehensive commercial products. This difference in program design may result in S-SCHIP potentially being less responsive to children with special needs (CSHCNs). This study explores how responsive insurers are to these higher than average needs. We found that, with one exception, insurers did not agree on the coverage of any specific service, but overall they provided coverage beyond state limits and exclusions. Second, the less acute the childhood condition, the more frequently insurers imposed exclusions. Finally, in the majority of states, some insurers excluded services that arguably should have been covered according to the plan/contract language. We conclude that SCHIP coverage at current levels may not be sufficient to care for CSHCNs, making external reviews of insurers' coverage decisions and coordination with other sources of care important components of SCHIP program design.

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
×
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