Goldberg L G, Greenberg W
J Health Polit Policy Law. 1977 Spring;2(1):48-78. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2-1-48.
The trial record in an antitrust case against the Oregon State Medical Society, finally decided in 1952, was examined to reconstruct the behavior of a competitive market for health insurance coverage. Health insurers, called "hospital associations," were found to have engaged individually in cost-control efforts similar to, but possibly more aggressive than, today's utilization review under professional sponsorship. The subsequent disappearance of these insurer-initiated cost controls in Oregon is traced to the medical society's organization of a competing Blue Shield plan as a model of insurer conduct and to a simultaneous boycott by physicians of the hospital associations as long as they persisted in questioning doctors' practices. Some modern parallels are noted, and the advantages of fostering privately sponsored cost-control efforts are suggested.
对俄勒冈州医学协会的一起反垄断案件的审判记录进行了审查,该案件最终于1952年做出裁决,目的是重建健康保险市场的竞争行为。被称为“医院协会”的健康保险公司被发现各自开展了成本控制措施,这些措施与如今在专业机构支持下进行的使用情况审查类似,但可能更为激进。俄勒冈州这些由保险公司发起的成本控制措施随后消失,原因是医学协会组织了一个竞争性的蓝盾计划作为保险公司行为的典范,以及只要医院协会坚持质疑医生的行医方式,医生们就会同时联合抵制它们。文中指出了一些现代社会与之类似的情况,并提出了鼓励私人资助成本控制措施的好处。