Miller R H, Luft H S
University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Health Aff (Millwood). 1997 Sep-Oct;16(5):7-25. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.16.5.7.
We analyzed evidence on managed care plan (mostly health maintenance organization, or HMO) performance from thirty-seven recently published peer-reviewed studies. Quality-of-care evidence from fifteen studies showed an equal number of significantly better and worse HMO results, compared with non-HMO plans. However, in several instances, Medicare HMO enrollees with chronic conditions showed worse quality of care. Evidence comparing hospital and physician resource use showed no clear pattern, whereas evidence on enrollee satisfaction varied by measure and enrollee type. Although recent research provides useful findings, interpreting and generalizing from these relatively few studies is difficult. Fears that HMOs uniformly lead to worse quality of care are not supported by the evidence, although all quality data were collected prior to the recent round of cost cutting that started in 1992. Hopes that HMOs would improve overall quality also are not supported, in part because of slow clinical practice change, lack of risk-adjusted capitation rates, and inadequate quality measurement and reporting.
我们分析了37项最近发表的同行评审研究中关于管理式医疗计划(主要是健康维护组织,即HMO)绩效的证据。15项研究中的医疗质量证据显示,与非HMO计划相比,HMO的结果显著更好和更差的数量相同。然而,在某些情况下,患有慢性病的医疗保险HMO参保者的医疗质量较差。比较医院和医生资源使用情况的证据没有显示出明确的模式,而参保者满意度的证据则因衡量标准和参保者类型而异。尽管最近的研究提供了有用的发现,但从这些相对较少的研究中进行解释和归纳却很困难。尽管所有质量数据都是在1992年开始的最近一轮成本削减之前收集的,但证据并不支持HMO普遍导致医疗质量下降的担忧。HMO会提高整体质量的希望也没有得到支持,部分原因是临床实践变化缓慢、缺乏风险调整后的人头费率以及质量衡量和报告不足。