Yesalis C E, Lipson D P, Norwood G J, Helling D K, Burmeister L F, Jones M E, Fisher W P
Med Care. 1984 Aug;22(8):737-45.
Results of a two-county pilot study in Iowa revealed that capitation may have significant advantages over fee-for-service (FFS) reimbursement in the Medicaid drug program. Consequently, the capitation program was expanded to 32 counties on April 1, 1981 and continued through December 31, 1981. Another 32 counties were used as part of a before:after/experimental:control design. Pharmacists were paid 80% of projected drug expenditures in advance based on the types of Medicaid eligibles who chose them as their providers. The remaining 20% was withheld in an escrow account to be used for supplemental, emergency, and bonus payments. Pharmacists who participated in this experiment were guaranteed that their gross profits on Medicaid prescriptions would remain at least equal to what they would have been if they had remained under the current FFS payment system. Major differences in drug use levels and pharmacist dispensing behavior under capitation financing were observed in the pilot study. However, no such changes associated with payment type were noted in the expanded program. Relative to these findings, a discussion of pharmacist attitudes is presented.
爱荷华州一项两县试点研究的结果显示,在医疗补助药品项目中,按人头付费可能比按服务收费(FFS)报销具有显著优势。因此,按人头付费项目于1981年4月1日扩展至32个县,并持续到1981年12月31日。另外32个县被用作前后对照/实验对照设计的一部分。根据选择他们作为提供者的医疗补助合格者类型,药剂师会提前获得预计药品支出的80%。其余20%被暂扣在一个代管账户中,用于补充、应急和奖金支付。参与该实验的药剂师得到保证,他们在医疗补助处方上的毛利润将至少与他们留在现行按服务收费支付系统下时的利润相当。在试点研究中观察到了按人头付费融资下药品使用水平和药剂师配药行为的重大差异。然而,在扩展项目中未发现与支付类型相关的此类变化。相对于这些发现,本文还讨论了药剂师的态度。