医疗保健的另一个“大交易”:当代美国卫生法中的直接初级保健监管。

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Duke Law Journal Pub Date : 2017-03-01
Glenn E Chappell
{"title":"医疗保健的另一个“大交易”:当代美国卫生法中的直接初级保健监管。","authors":"Glenn E Chappell","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Direct primary care is a promising, market-based alternative to the fee-for-service payment structure that shapes doctor–patient\nrelationships in America. Instead of billing patients and insurers service by service, direct primary care doctors charge their patients a periodic, prenegotiated fee in exchange for providing a wide range of healthcare services and increased availability compared to traditional practices. This “subscription” model is intended to eliminate the administrative burdens associated with insurer interaction, which, in theory, allows doctors to spend more time with their patients and less time doing paperwork.\nDirect practices have become increasingly popular since Congress passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This growth has been driven by legislation in several states that resolves a number of legal questions that slowed the model’s growth and by the ACA’s\nrecognition of the model as a permissible way to cover primary care in \"approved\" health plans. Yet legal scholars have hardly focused on direct primary care. Given the model’s growth, however, the time is ripe for a more focused legal inquiry. This Note begins that inquiry. After tracing the model’s evolution and its core components, this Note substantively examines the laws in\nstates that regulate direct practices and analyzes how those laws address a number of potential policy concerns. It then analyzes direct primary care’s broader role in the contemporary American healthcare marketplace. Based upon that analysis, this Note concludes that direct primary care is a beneficial innovation that harmonizes well with a cooperative-federalism-based healthcare policy model.</p>","PeriodicalId":47625,"journal":{"name":"Duke Law Journal","volume":"66 6","pages":"1331-70"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health Care's Other \\\"Big Deal\\\": Direct Primary Care Regulation in Contemporary American Health Law.\",\"authors\":\"Glenn E Chappell\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Direct primary care is a promising, market-based alternative to the fee-for-service payment structure that shapes doctor–patient\\nrelationships in America. Instead of billing patients and insurers service by service, direct primary care doctors charge their patients a periodic, prenegotiated fee in exchange for providing a wide range of healthcare services and increased availability compared to traditional practices. This “subscription” model is intended to eliminate the administrative burdens associated with insurer interaction, which, in theory, allows doctors to spend more time with their patients and less time doing paperwork.\\nDirect practices have become increasingly popular since Congress passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This growth has been driven by legislation in several states that resolves a number of legal questions that slowed the model’s growth and by the ACA’s\\nrecognition of the model as a permissible way to cover primary care in \\\"approved\\\" health plans. Yet legal scholars have hardly focused on direct primary care. Given the model’s growth, however, the time is ripe for a more focused legal inquiry. This Note begins that inquiry. After tracing the model’s evolution and its core components, this Note substantively examines the laws in\\nstates that regulate direct practices and analyzes how those laws address a number of potential policy concerns. It then analyzes direct primary care’s broader role in the contemporary American healthcare marketplace. Based upon that analysis, this Note concludes that direct primary care is a beneficial innovation that harmonizes well with a cooperative-federalism-based healthcare policy model.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47625,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Duke Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"66 6\",\"pages\":\"1331-70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Duke Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Duke Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

直接初级保健是一种很有前途的、以市场为基础的替代方案,它取代了影响美国医患关系的按服务收费的支付结构。直接初级保健医生不是按服务向患者和保险公司收费,而是定期向患者收取预先商定的费用,以换取提供广泛的医疗保健服务,并与传统做法相比增加了可用性。这种“订阅”模式旨在消除与保险公司互动相关的行政负担,从理论上讲,这使得医生可以花更多的时间与病人在一起,而不用花更多的时间做文书工作。自国会通过《平价医疗法案》(ACA)以来,直接实践越来越受欢迎。这一增长是由几个州的立法推动的,这些立法解决了许多减缓该模式发展的法律问题,同时ACA也承认该模式是一种在“批准的”健康计划中涵盖初级保健的允许方式。然而,法律学者很少关注直接初级保健。然而,鉴于该模式的发展,进行更有针对性的法律调查的时机已经成熟。本照会开始进行这项调查。在追踪了模型的演变及其核心组成部分之后,本说明实质性地检查了规范直接实践的法律状态,并分析了这些法律如何处理一些潜在的政策问题。然后分析了直接初级保健在当代美国医疗保健市场中更广泛的作用。根据这一分析,本文得出结论,直接初级保健是一项有益的创新,它与基于合作联邦制的医疗保健政策模型很好地协调一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Health Care's Other "Big Deal": Direct Primary Care Regulation in Contemporary American Health Law.

Direct primary care is a promising, market-based alternative to the fee-for-service payment structure that shapes doctor–patient relationships in America. Instead of billing patients and insurers service by service, direct primary care doctors charge their patients a periodic, prenegotiated fee in exchange for providing a wide range of healthcare services and increased availability compared to traditional practices. This “subscription” model is intended to eliminate the administrative burdens associated with insurer interaction, which, in theory, allows doctors to spend more time with their patients and less time doing paperwork. Direct practices have become increasingly popular since Congress passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This growth has been driven by legislation in several states that resolves a number of legal questions that slowed the model’s growth and by the ACA’s recognition of the model as a permissible way to cover primary care in "approved" health plans. Yet legal scholars have hardly focused on direct primary care. Given the model’s growth, however, the time is ripe for a more focused legal inquiry. This Note begins that inquiry. After tracing the model’s evolution and its core components, this Note substantively examines the laws in states that regulate direct practices and analyzes how those laws address a number of potential policy concerns. It then analyzes direct primary care’s broader role in the contemporary American healthcare marketplace. Based upon that analysis, this Note concludes that direct primary care is a beneficial innovation that harmonizes well with a cooperative-federalism-based healthcare policy model.

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
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The first issue of what was to become the Duke Law Journal was published in March 1951 as the Duke Bar Journal. Created to provide a medium for student expression, the Duke Bar Journal consisted entirely of student-written and student-edited work until 1953, when it began publishing faculty contributions. To reflect the inclusion of faculty scholarship, the Duke Bar Journal became the Duke Law Journal in 1957. In 1969, the Journal published its inaugural Administrative Law Symposium issue, a tradition that continues today. Volume 1 of the Duke Bar Journal spanned two issues and 259 pages. In 1959, the Journal grew to four issues and 649 pages, growing again in 1970 to six issues and 1263 pages. Today, the Duke Law Journal publishes eight issues per volume. Our staff is committed to the purpose set forth in our constitution: to publish legal writing of superior quality. We seek to publish a collection of outstanding scholarship from established legal writers, up-and-coming authors, and our own student editors.
×
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