Emanuel E J, Emanuel L L
Harvard Medical School, USA.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 1997 Feb;22(1):147-84. doi: 10.1215/03616878-22-1-147.
There are two prominent trends in health care today: first, increasing demands for accountabilty, and second, increasing provision of care through managed care organizations. These trends promote the question: What form of account-ability is appropriate to managed care plans? Accountability is the process by which a party justifies its actions and policies. Components of accountability include parties that can be held or hold others accountable, domains and content areas being assessed, and procedures of assessment. Traditionally, the professional model of accountability has operated in medical care. In this model, physicians establish the standards of accountability and hold each other accountable through professional organizations. This form of accountability seems outdated and inapplicable to managed care plans. The alternatives are the economic and the political models of accountability. In the economic model, medicine becomes more like a commodity, and "exit" (consumers changing providers for reasons of cost and quality) is the dominant procedure of accountability. In the political model, medicine becomes more like a community good, and "voice" (citizens communicating their views in public forums or on policy committees, or in elections for representatives) is the dominant procedure of accountability. The economic model's advantages affirm American individualism, make minimal demands on consumers, and use a powerful incentive, money. Its disadvantages undermine health care as a nonmarket good, undermine individual autonomy, undermine good medical practice, impose significant demands on consumers to be informed, sustain differentials of power, and use indirect procedures of accountability. The political model's advantages affirm health care as a matter of justice, permit selecting domains other than price and quality for accountability, reinforce good medical practice, and equalize power between patients and physicians. Its disadvantages include inefficiency in decision making, capture by extremists or experts, intractable value conflicts, fragmentation of community, and oppression of minorities. The political model is the model we should endorse. Its disadvantages can be minimized by proper institutional design. In addition, recent research on managed care plans suggests that the political model may be the best for a competitive marketplace because it can ensure that tough allocation decisions are addressed and improve health through changes in nonmedical aspects of community life.
其一,对问责制的需求不断增加;其二,通过管理式医疗组织提供的护理日益增多。这些趋势引发了一个问题:何种形式的问责制适用于管理式医疗计划?问责制是指一方为其行动和政策辩护的过程。问责制的组成部分包括可被追究责任或追究他人责任的各方、被评估的领域和内容领域,以及评估程序。传统上,医疗保健领域实行的是专业问责模式。在这种模式下,医生制定问责标准,并通过专业组织相互问责。这种问责形式似乎已过时,不适用于管理式医疗计划。可供选择的是经济问责模式和政治问责模式。在经济模式中,医疗更像是一种商品,“退出”(消费者因成本和质量原因更换提供者)是主要的问责程序。在政治模式中,医疗更像是一种公共利益,“发声”(公民在公共论坛、政策委员会或代表选举中表达自己的观点)是主要的问责程序。经济模式的优点在于肯定了美国个人主义,对消费者要求极低,并使用了强大的激励手段——金钱。其缺点在于破坏了作为非市场商品的医疗保健,损害了个人自主权,破坏了良好的医疗实践,对消费者获取信息提出了重大要求,维持了权力差异,并采用了间接问责程序。政治模式的优点在于将医疗保健视为正义问题,允许选择价格和质量以外的领域进行问责,强化了良好的医疗实践,并平衡了医患之间的权力。其缺点包括决策效率低下、被极端分子或专家掌控、价值冲突难以解决、社区分裂以及少数群体受压迫。政治模式是我们应该认可的模式。通过适当的制度设计,其缺点可以降至最低。此外,最近对管理式医疗计划的研究表明,政治模式可能最适合竞争激烈的市场,因为它可以确保解决艰难的资源分配决策,并通过改变社区生活的非医疗方面来改善健康状况。