回到未来:管理式医疗革命

Q2 Social Sciences
G. Agrawal, H. R. Veit
{"title":"回到未来:管理式医疗革命","authors":"G. Agrawal, H. R. Veit","doi":"10.2307/1192279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I INTRODUCTION Revolutions that result in sudden and radical change to a society's essential attributes are rare occurrences. Rather, from biology to social policy, the present is the result of an evolutionary progression of interrelated phenomena. The forces that prompt a period of rapid evolution are often not apparent, except in hindsight. The evolutionary process, once begun, is difficult to orchestrate, and the results hard to predict. The evolution of the managed care industry is a case in point. Initiatives by the private sector and government to make medical care accessible to a larger percentage of the population exacerbated, rather than ameliorated, the costs of health care services. The market-based reforms that followed were intended to provide consumers with information and financial incentives to make wise economical choices, but instead gave rise to a clamor of consumer complaints, while posting only temporary gains in controlling health care costs. The nation is once again faced with calls for reform of its patchwork system of health care delivery and financing. This article provides an overview of the interrelated events that led to the present-day managed care system. We begin with the stimuli for change to the longstanding medical model status quo. A paradigmatic shift from a physician-dominated professional model to a market-based system characterized the revolutionary period that followed. Before that shift could occur, however, Congress had to abandon its regulatory zeal to create a political climate in which policy-makers perceived market-based reform as a viable alternative to both regulatory fiat and professional control. Equally important to legislative willingness was the elimination of systemic impediments to market reforms, principally the organized resistance of the professionals who controlled the system. These events opened the way for suggestions about the direction that market-driven evolution should follow and the translation of scholarly insight into political reality. In this article, we revisit these events, describe the system that evolved, and conclude with some suggestions for future directions. II THE PAST AS PRELUDE The story of the pre-managed care era is one of miscues and well-intentioned missteps. Although the stirrings of the health care revolution became readily apparent shortly after the enactment of the Medicare and Medicaid programs, both the events that gave rise to the need for change and the form that change took had much earlier origins. The years that preceded the managed care era were remarkable for the juxtaposition of the relative stability and lack of diversity among the organizational arrangements for the delivery and financing of health care services, and the rapid changes in society and medical science. As third-party financing grew and physicians expanded their sphere of influence to include payment mechanisms as well as health care delivery, attempts to expand access to health care services without fundamentally changing highly prized practice patterns led to unsustainable levels of health care spending. The health care delivery system had long been static. Most physicians were self-employed, predominantly in solo practice, and the ratio between capital and labor in the typical practice was low. (1) Vertical integration of individual and institutional providers was rare. The result was a non-system of independent small business bereft of any means to coordinate the delivery of medical services to ensure their continuity, quality, or cost-effectiveness. The efforts to finance health care services exhibited only slightly more variation. In the early years of the twentieth century, medical services were a market good. As with all market goods, an individual's access to health care services was based primarily on her ability to buy them. …","PeriodicalId":39484,"journal":{"name":"Law and Contemporary Problems","volume":"133 1","pages":"11-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Back to the Future: The Managed Care Revolution\",\"authors\":\"G. Agrawal, H. R. Veit\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/1192279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I INTRODUCTION Revolutions that result in sudden and radical change to a society's essential attributes are rare occurrences. Rather, from biology to social policy, the present is the result of an evolutionary progression of interrelated phenomena. The forces that prompt a period of rapid evolution are often not apparent, except in hindsight. The evolutionary process, once begun, is difficult to orchestrate, and the results hard to predict. The evolution of the managed care industry is a case in point. Initiatives by the private sector and government to make medical care accessible to a larger percentage of the population exacerbated, rather than ameliorated, the costs of health care services. The market-based reforms that followed were intended to provide consumers with information and financial incentives to make wise economical choices, but instead gave rise to a clamor of consumer complaints, while posting only temporary gains in controlling health care costs. The nation is once again faced with calls for reform of its patchwork system of health care delivery and financing. This article provides an overview of the interrelated events that led to the present-day managed care system. We begin with the stimuli for change to the longstanding medical model status quo. A paradigmatic shift from a physician-dominated professional model to a market-based system characterized the revolutionary period that followed. Before that shift could occur, however, Congress had to abandon its regulatory zeal to create a political climate in which policy-makers perceived market-based reform as a viable alternative to both regulatory fiat and professional control. Equally important to legislative willingness was the elimination of systemic impediments to market reforms, principally the organized resistance of the professionals who controlled the system. These events opened the way for suggestions about the direction that market-driven evolution should follow and the translation of scholarly insight into political reality. In this article, we revisit these events, describe the system that evolved, and conclude with some suggestions for future directions. II THE PAST AS PRELUDE The story of the pre-managed care era is one of miscues and well-intentioned missteps. Although the stirrings of the health care revolution became readily apparent shortly after the enactment of the Medicare and Medicaid programs, both the events that gave rise to the need for change and the form that change took had much earlier origins. The years that preceded the managed care era were remarkable for the juxtaposition of the relative stability and lack of diversity among the organizational arrangements for the delivery and financing of health care services, and the rapid changes in society and medical science. As third-party financing grew and physicians expanded their sphere of influence to include payment mechanisms as well as health care delivery, attempts to expand access to health care services without fundamentally changing highly prized practice patterns led to unsustainable levels of health care spending. The health care delivery system had long been static. Most physicians were self-employed, predominantly in solo practice, and the ratio between capital and labor in the typical practice was low. (1) Vertical integration of individual and institutional providers was rare. The result was a non-system of independent small business bereft of any means to coordinate the delivery of medical services to ensure their continuity, quality, or cost-effectiveness. The efforts to finance health care services exhibited only slightly more variation. In the early years of the twentieth century, medical services were a market good. As with all market goods, an individual's access to health care services was based primarily on her ability to buy them. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":39484,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Contemporary Problems\",\"volume\":\"133 1\",\"pages\":\"11-54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Contemporary Problems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/1192279\",\"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/10.2307/1192279","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: 5

摘要

导致社会基本属性发生突然而彻底变化的革命是罕见的。相反,从生物学到社会政策,现在是相互关联的现象进化过程的结果。推动一段时期快速进化的力量往往不明显,除非事后诸葛亮。进化过程一旦开始,就很难安排,结果也很难预测。管理式医疗行业的发展就是一个很好的例子。私营部门和政府为使更大比例的人口获得医疗服务而采取的举措加剧了而不是降低了保健服务的成本。随后的市场化改革旨在为消费者提供信息和财政激励,以做出明智的经济选择,但却引起了消费者的抱怨,同时在控制医疗成本方面只取得了暂时的成果。这个国家再次面临着改革其医疗服务提供和融资的拼凑系统的呼声。本文概述了导致当今管理式医疗系统的相关事件。我们从改变长期存在的医疗模式现状的刺激因素开始。从以医生为主导的专业模式到以市场为基础的体系的典型转变是随后的革命时期的特征。然而,在这种转变发生之前,国会必须放弃监管热情,创造一种政治氛围,让政策制定者认为,基于市场的改革是监管法令和专业控制之外的可行选择。对立法意愿同样重要的是消除市场改革的体制障碍,主要是控制体制的专业人员有组织的抵抗。这些事件为有关市场驱动的演变应遵循的方向以及将学术见解转化为政治现实的建议开辟了道路。在本文中,我们将回顾这些事件,描述已发展的系统,并对未来的发展方向提出一些建议。前管理式医疗时代的故事是一个失误和善意的失误。尽管在医疗保险和医疗补助计划颁布后不久,医疗保健革命的萌芽就很明显了,但引起变革需求的事件和变革的形式都有更早的起源。在管理式医疗时代之前的那些年是值得注意的,因为在提供和资助卫生保健服务的组织安排中,相对稳定和缺乏多样性,以及社会和医学科学的快速变化并存。随着第三方融资的增长和医生扩大其影响范围,包括支付机制和保健服务的提供,试图扩大获得保健服务的机会,而不从根本上改变高度重视的做法模式,导致保健支出水平不可持续。长期以来,卫生保健系统一直处于停滞状态。大多数医生都是个体户,以个人执业为主,典型执业中资本与劳动力的比例较低。(1)个人和机构供应商的纵向整合很少。其结果是一个独立的小型企业的非系统,没有任何手段来协调医疗服务的提供,以确保其连续性、质量或成本效益。为卫生保健服务提供资金的努力只表现出稍微大一点的差异。在20世纪早期,医疗服务是一种市场商品。与所有市场商品一样,个人能否获得保健服务主要取决于其购买能力。...
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Back to the Future: The Managed Care Revolution
I INTRODUCTION Revolutions that result in sudden and radical change to a society's essential attributes are rare occurrences. Rather, from biology to social policy, the present is the result of an evolutionary progression of interrelated phenomena. The forces that prompt a period of rapid evolution are often not apparent, except in hindsight. The evolutionary process, once begun, is difficult to orchestrate, and the results hard to predict. The evolution of the managed care industry is a case in point. Initiatives by the private sector and government to make medical care accessible to a larger percentage of the population exacerbated, rather than ameliorated, the costs of health care services. The market-based reforms that followed were intended to provide consumers with information and financial incentives to make wise economical choices, but instead gave rise to a clamor of consumer complaints, while posting only temporary gains in controlling health care costs. The nation is once again faced with calls for reform of its patchwork system of health care delivery and financing. This article provides an overview of the interrelated events that led to the present-day managed care system. We begin with the stimuli for change to the longstanding medical model status quo. A paradigmatic shift from a physician-dominated professional model to a market-based system characterized the revolutionary period that followed. Before that shift could occur, however, Congress had to abandon its regulatory zeal to create a political climate in which policy-makers perceived market-based reform as a viable alternative to both regulatory fiat and professional control. Equally important to legislative willingness was the elimination of systemic impediments to market reforms, principally the organized resistance of the professionals who controlled the system. These events opened the way for suggestions about the direction that market-driven evolution should follow and the translation of scholarly insight into political reality. In this article, we revisit these events, describe the system that evolved, and conclude with some suggestions for future directions. II THE PAST AS PRELUDE The story of the pre-managed care era is one of miscues and well-intentioned missteps. Although the stirrings of the health care revolution became readily apparent shortly after the enactment of the Medicare and Medicaid programs, both the events that gave rise to the need for change and the form that change took had much earlier origins. The years that preceded the managed care era were remarkable for the juxtaposition of the relative stability and lack of diversity among the organizational arrangements for the delivery and financing of health care services, and the rapid changes in society and medical science. As third-party financing grew and physicians expanded their sphere of influence to include payment mechanisms as well as health care delivery, attempts to expand access to health care services without fundamentally changing highly prized practice patterns led to unsustainable levels of health care spending. The health care delivery system had long been static. Most physicians were self-employed, predominantly in solo practice, and the ratio between capital and labor in the typical practice was low. (1) Vertical integration of individual and institutional providers was rare. The result was a non-system of independent small business bereft of any means to coordinate the delivery of medical services to ensure their continuity, quality, or cost-effectiveness. The efforts to finance health care services exhibited only slightly more variation. In the early years of the twentieth century, medical services were a market good. As with all market goods, an individual's access to health care services was based primarily on her ability to buy them. …
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.
×
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