• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

为什么不给慢性病患者最好的呢?

Why not the best for the chronically ill?

作者信息

Jones S B

机构信息

Health Insurance Reform Project, George Washington University, Washington, D.C., USA.

出版信息

Hosp J. 1998;13(1-2):101-15. doi: 10.1080/0742-969x.1998.11882891.

DOI:10.1080/0742-969x.1998.11882891
PMID:9644396
Abstract

Premium adjustors to neutralize risk selection among health plans are the weakest component in the technology for assuring competitive markets. It will be many years before we have adjustors adequate to free health plans to invest in and market improved managed care to predictably high-cost chronically ill persons. For want of a fair premium, health plans are driven by risk selection to underinvest in and otherwise "demarket" care to these very employees and beneficiaries whose costs and care most need to be managed. To achieve best value for the chronically ill, large employer coalitions, Medicare, and Medicaid should consider radical new approaches, such as establishing separate prices for care to people with specific chronic conditions and purchasing such care both from health plans and directly from provider systems.

摘要

用于抵消健康计划之间风险选择的保费调整机制是确保竞争性市场的技术中最薄弱的环节。在我们拥有足够的调整机制,使健康计划能够放心地投资并向可预测的高成本慢性病患者推销改进的管理式医疗之前,还需要很多年。由于缺乏公平的保费,健康计划受风险选择驱动,对这些成本和护理最需要管理的员工和受益人投资不足,并在其他方面减少对他们的护理服务。为了让慢性病患者获得最佳价值,大型雇主联盟、医疗保险和医疗补助计划应考虑激进的新方法,例如为患有特定慢性病的人制定单独的护理价格,并从健康计划和直接从医疗服务提供系统购买此类护理。

相似文献

1
Why not the best for the chronically ill?为什么不给慢性病患者最好的呢?
Hosp J. 1998;13(1-2):101-15. doi: 10.1080/0742-969x.1998.11882891.
2
Why not the best for the chronically ill?为何不为慢性病患者提供最佳治疗?
Res Agenda Brief. 1996 Jan(3):1-9.
3
Care of the chronically ill.慢性病护理。
Nurs Adm Q. 2000 Spring;24(3):v-vi. doi: 10.1097/00006216-200004000-00001.
4
Costs, commitment and locality: a comparison of for-profit and not-for-profit health plans.成本、承诺与地区性:营利性与非营利性健康保险计划的比较
Inquiry. 2004 Summer;41(2):116-29. doi: 10.5034/inquiryjrnl_41.2.116.
5
Managed care and Medicare reform.管理式医疗与医疗保险改革。
J Health Polit Policy Law. 1997 Apr;22(2):595-631. doi: 10.1215/03616878-22-2-595.
6
Are managed care Medicare beneficiaries with chronic conditions satisfied with their care?患有慢性病的医保管理式医疗受益人群对其医疗服务满意吗?
J Aging Health. 2006 Feb;18(1):70-90. doi: 10.1177/0898264305280997.
7
Medicaid-dependent hospitals and their patients: how have they fared?依赖医疗补助的医院及其患者:他们的情况如何?
Health Serv Res. 1998 Jun;33(2 Pt 1):163-85.
8
Quality management practices in Medicaid managed care: a national survey of Medicaid and commercial health plans participating in the Medicaid program.医疗补助管理式医疗中的质量管理实践:对参与医疗补助计划的医疗补助和商业健康保险计划的全国性调查。
JAMA. 1999 Nov 10;282(18):1769-75. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.18.1769.
9
What are Medicare managed care plans doing to measure and improve quality of care?医疗保险管理式医疗计划在衡量和改善医疗质量方面采取了哪些举措?
Qual Manag Health Care. 2000 Fall;9(1):49-58. doi: 10.1097/00019514-200009010-00007.
10
Utilization of services by chronically ill people in managed care and indemnity plans: implications for quality.慢性病患者在管理式医疗和赔偿计划中的服务利用情况:对质量的影响。
Inquiry. 2003 Spring;40(1):57-70. doi: 10.5034/inquiryjrnl_40.1.57.