如何支付医疗保健。

IF 9.1 4区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Harvard business review Pub Date : 2016-07-01
Michael E Porter, Robert S Kaplan
{"title":"如何支付医疗保健。","authors":"Michael E Porter,&nbsp;Robert S Kaplan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The United States stands at a crossroads in how to pay for health care. Fee for service, the dominant payment model in the U.S. and many other countries, is now widely recognized as perhaps the single biggest obstacle to improving health care delivery. A battle is currently raging, outside of the public eye, between the advocates of two radically different payment approaches: capitation and bundled payments. The stakes are high, and the outcome will define the shape of the health care system for many years to come, for better or for worse. In this article, the authors argue that although capitation may deliver modest savings in the short run, it brings significant risks and will fail to fundamentally change the trajectory of a broken system. The bundled payment model, in contrast, triggers competition between providers to create value where it matters--at the individual patient level--and puts health care on the right path. The authors provide robust proof-of-concept examples of bundled payment initiatives in the U.S. and abroad, address the challenges of transitioning to bundled payments, and respond to critics' concerns about obstacles to implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12874,"journal":{"name":"Harvard business review","volume":"94 7-8","pages":"88-98, 100, 134"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to Pay for Health Care.\",\"authors\":\"Michael E Porter,&nbsp;Robert S Kaplan\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The United States stands at a crossroads in how to pay for health care. Fee for service, the dominant payment model in the U.S. and many other countries, is now widely recognized as perhaps the single biggest obstacle to improving health care delivery. A battle is currently raging, outside of the public eye, between the advocates of two radically different payment approaches: capitation and bundled payments. The stakes are high, and the outcome will define the shape of the health care system for many years to come, for better or for worse. In this article, the authors argue that although capitation may deliver modest savings in the short run, it brings significant risks and will fail to fundamentally change the trajectory of a broken system. The bundled payment model, in contrast, triggers competition between providers to create value where it matters--at the individual patient level--and puts health care on the right path. The authors provide robust proof-of-concept examples of bundled payment initiatives in the U.S. and abroad, address the challenges of transitioning to bundled payments, and respond to critics' concerns about obstacles to implementation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12874,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Harvard business review\",\"volume\":\"94 7-8\",\"pages\":\"88-98, 100, 134\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Harvard business review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard business review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国正站在如何支付医疗保健费用的十字路口。在美国和许多其他国家,按服务收费是主要的支付模式,现在被广泛认为可能是改善医疗保健服务的最大障碍。目前,在公众视线之外,两种截然不同的支付方式——人头化支付和捆绑支付——的倡导者之间正在展开一场激烈的斗争。赌注很高,结果将决定未来许多年医疗体系的形态,是好是坏。在这篇文章中,作者认为,尽管资本化可能在短期内带来适度的储蓄,但它带来了重大风险,并且无法从根本上改变一个破碎的系统的轨迹。相比之下,捆绑支付模式引发了供应商之间的竞争,在重要的地方创造价值——在患者个人层面——并使医疗保健走上正确的道路。作者提供了美国和国外捆绑式支付计划的有力的概念验证示例,解决了向捆绑式支付过渡的挑战,并回应了批评者对实施障碍的担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How to Pay for Health Care.

The United States stands at a crossroads in how to pay for health care. Fee for service, the dominant payment model in the U.S. and many other countries, is now widely recognized as perhaps the single biggest obstacle to improving health care delivery. A battle is currently raging, outside of the public eye, between the advocates of two radically different payment approaches: capitation and bundled payments. The stakes are high, and the outcome will define the shape of the health care system for many years to come, for better or for worse. In this article, the authors argue that although capitation may deliver modest savings in the short run, it brings significant risks and will fail to fundamentally change the trajectory of a broken system. The bundled payment model, in contrast, triggers competition between providers to create value where it matters--at the individual patient level--and puts health care on the right path. The authors provide robust proof-of-concept examples of bundled payment initiatives in the U.S. and abroad, address the challenges of transitioning to bundled payments, and respond to critics' concerns about obstacles to implementation.

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
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: HBR covers a wide range of topics, including strategy, leadership, organizational change, negotiations, operations, innovation, decision making, marketing, finance, work-life balance, and managing teams. We publish articles of many lengths (some in both print and digital forms, and some in digital only), graphics, podcasts, videos, slide presentations, and just about any other media that might help us share an idea effectively.
×
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