Must good HMOS go bad? First of two parts: The commercialization of prepaid group health care

New England Journal of Medicine

Volumn 338, Issue 21, 1998, Pages 1558-1563

  Kuttner, Robert ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HEALTH CARE; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SHORT SURVEY;

CLINICAL APPROACH/SOURCE; HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH; INCENTIVES; REMUNERATION; UNITED STATES;

CAPITATION FEE; COMMERCE; COST CONTROL; ECONOMIC COMPETITION; ENTREPRENEURSHIP; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATIONS; HUMANS; INCOME; MARKETING OF HEALTH SERVICES; ORGANIZATIONAL POLICY; PHYSICIANS; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY; UNITED STATES; WITHHOLDING TREATMENT;

EID: 0032554946     PISSN: 00284793     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199805213382123     Document Type: Short Survey

References (20)

1. Starr P. The social transformation of American medicine. New York: Basic Books, 1982.
2. Crowley W. To serve the greatest number. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1996.
3. Market facts, February 1998. Menlo Park, Calif.: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 1998.
4. Nelson H. Nonprofit and for-profit HMOs: converging practices but different goals? New York: Milbank Memorial Fund, 1997:1.
5. Simon CJ, Emmons DW. Physician earnings at risk: an examination of capitated contracts. Health Aff (Millwood) 1997;16(3):120-6.
6. Patient access to internist-subspecialists in gatekeeper health plans. Washington, D.C.: American Society of Internal Medicine, August 1995: 6.
7. Ware JE Jr, Bayliss MS, Rogers WH, Kosinski M, Tarlov AR. Differences in 4-year health outcomes for elderly and poor, chronically ill patients treated in HMO and fee-for-service systems: results from the Medical Outcomes Study. JAMA 1996;276:1039-47.
8. Capitation strategy. Washington, D.C.: Advisory Board, 1996:171.
9. Thompson RS. What have HMOs learned about clinical prevention services? An examination of the experience at Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound. Milbank Q 1996;74(4):469-509.
10. Consumer satisfaction with HMOs. San Francisco: Pacific Business Group on Health, 1997.
11. Quality care compensation system: monthly sample reporting package. Blue Bell, Pa.: Aetna U.S. Healthcare, 1997.
12. Assuring appropriate patient care under capitation arrangements. Washington, D.C.: American Society of Internal Medicine, August 1995.
13. Requirements for physician incentive plans. No. 42CFR417.479. Rev. ed. Washington, D.C.: Health Care Financing Administration, October 1, 1997.
14. Report to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Form 10-Q. Oxford Health Plans, September 30, 1997.
15. Future revenues: sustainable growth strategies for America's health systems. Washington, D.C.: Health Care Advisory Board, 1997:15.
16. Luft HS, Greenlick MR. The contribution of group- and staff-model HMOs to American medicine. Milbank Q 1996;74(4):445-67.
17. Gold MR, Hurley R, Lake T, Ensor T, Berenson R. A national survey of the arrangements managed-care plans make with physicians. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1678-83.
18. Comparing Medicare HMOS: do they keep their members? Washington, D.C.: Families USA, 1997.
19. Consumer Reports. August 1996:40-1.
20. The HMO honor roll. U.S. News & World Report. October 23, 1997: 62.