The changing landscape of health care financing and delivery: how are rural communities and providers responding?
(9/263)
Rural communities have not kept pace with the recent dramatic changes in health care financing and organization. However, the Medicare provisions in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 will require rural providers to participate in the new systems. Case studies revealed the degree of readiness for change in six rural communities and charted their progress along a continuum, as reflected in three sets of activities: the development of networking; the creation of new strategies for managing patient care; and the adoption of new methods for contracting with health insurers. Some communities had constructed highly integrated systems, whereas others were just beginning to change their billing practices; a few were signing contracts for capitated care, in contrast to those that were resisting discounts in current fee structures. These six rural areas still have considerable ground to cover before their health care organization and financing reach the levels achieved by urban communities. (+info)
Developing a managed care delivery system for people with HIV/AIDS.
(10/263)
Capitated managed care is now a significant part of the healthcare landscape in the United States. Consequently, states across the country are looking to it as a means of lowering their costs for Medicaid recipients. Implementing Medicaid managed care plans, however, requires considerable planning and research to ensure that providers are fairly reimbursed and that patients continue to receive quality care. Efforts to ensure adequate reimbursement and quality care are particularly important for persons with HIV/AIDS and those with other chronic conditions, populations that require considerable healthcare resources and often are covered by Medicaid. The transition to Medicaid managed care can be smoothed through stakeholder input and consideration of the overall healthcare marketplace and political climate, the structure of managed care organizations, the means of informing consumers of their managed care choices, the potential size of the Medicaid patient base, and the need to integrate clinical and social services for patients with HIV/AIDS. (+info)
Developing a managed care delivery system in New York State for Medicaid recipients with HIV.
(11/263)
In the state of New York, models of care known as HIV Special Needs Plans (HIV SNPs) are being developed to meet the unique health and medical needs of Medicaid recipients with HIV. Establishing managed care plans for the 80,000 to 100,000 HIV-infected Medicaid recipients residing in the state has required considerable effort, including distributing planning grants to solicit information and recommendations regarding program and fiscal policy; convening a workgroup to facilitate discussions between the state and the provider and consumer communities; conducting a longitudinal survey to assess the impact of managed care on persons with HIV; and developing a longitudinal, person-based, encounter-level database representing the clinical and service utilization histories of more than 100,000 patients for state fiscal years 1990 to 1996. The key fiscal issues identified and discussed were capitation rates, initial capitalization levels, and risk-adjustment mechanisms. Other pertinent issues included the importance of a benefits package supporting a comprehensive, integrated continuum of state-of-the-art services; marketing and enrollment; attention to provider and consumer training and education needs; and interdependence of financial reimbursement and benefits packages. From our experience in New York State, we conclude that a successful model of Medicaid managed care for persons with HIV should build on the existing infrastructure of services, using a collaborative process among government agencies, healthcare providers, and HIV/AIDS consumer communities. A future challenge lies in the implementation of the HIV SNP model and evaluation of its soundness and ability to ensure quality healthcare services. (+info)
Financial and risk considerations for successful disease management programs.
(12/263)
Results for disease management [DM] programs have not been as positive as hoped because of clinical issues, lack of access to capital, and administrative issues. The financial experience of DM programs can be quite volatile. Financial projections that are protocol-based, rather than experience-based, may understate the revenue required and the range of possible costs for a DM program by understating the impact of complicating conditions and comorbidities. Actuarial tools (risk analysis and risk projection models) support better understanding of DM contracts. In particular, these models can provide the ability to quantify the impact of the factors that drive costs of a contract and the volatility of those costs. This analysis can assist DM companies in setting appropriate revenue and capital targets. Similar analysis by health plans can identify diseases that are good candidates for DM programs and can provide the basis for performance targets. (+info)
Evaluation of common problems in primary care: effects of physician, practice, and financial characteristics.
(13/263)
OBJECTIVES: To identify the resource use and costs associated with the diagnosis of common problems in primary care practice and to investigate the influence of physician characteristics, practice organization, and financial incentives on physician behavior. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A national sample of 1721 primary care physicians from 53 managed care organizations were surveyed about their use of diagnostic laboratory, imaging, and invasive procedures; ambulatory visits; empiric drug therapies; and specialty consultations for a hypothetical middle-aged female patient presenting with 1 of 6 common clinical problems: depression, fatigue, impaired memory, anxiety, low back pain, or high cholesterol. Information regarding the physician's arrangement with managed care organizations was also collected. Cost estimates were made from Maryland Medicare Fee Schedule and Red Book data. RESULTS: Total costs (mean +/- standard deviation) were estimated for management of depression ($520 +/- $235), fatigue ($389 +/- $201), impaired memory ($569 +/- $243), high cholesterol ($367 +/- $191), low back pain ($726 +/- $369), and anxiety ($438 +/- $207). Younger physicians (less than 50 years old) generated higher costs in the treatment of depression but used fewer resources in the evaluation of high cholesterol. Physicians paid by salary had significantly lower costs compared with physicians in fee-for-service arrangements for depression and high cholesterol (P < .05). Physicians in multispecialty groups were more likely to have lower costs for depression and low back pain in multivariate analyses. More stringent financial incentives such as capitation, withholds, and bonuses were not associated with lower costs. CONCLUSIONS: Multispecialty group practice and compensation by salary consistently predict lower costs for evaluation of common problems in primary care practice. Financial incentives such as capitation, withholds, and bonuses were not associated with an effect on costs of diagnostic evaluation. (+info)
Financing the health care Internet.
(14/263)
Internet-related health care firms have accelerated through the life cycle of capital finance and organizational destiny, including venture capital funding, public stock offerings, and consolidation, in the wake of heightened competition and earnings disappointments. Venture capital flooded into the e-health sector, rising from $3 million in the first quarter of 1998 to $335 million two years later. Twenty-six e-health firms went public in eighteen months, raising $1.53 billion at initial public offering (IPO) and with post-IPO share price appreciation greater than 100 percent for eighteen firms. The technology-sector crash hit the e-health sector especially hard, driving share prices down by more than 80 percent for twenty-one firms. The industry now faces an extended period of consolidation between e-health and conventional firms. (+info)
Patients and profits: the relationship between HMO financial performance and quality of care.
(15/263)
This paper matches health plans' financial performance with information on quality ratings as measured by 1997 Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) 3.0 data. We address three policy questions: (1) Is the quality of care delivered by a plan influenced by the plan's financial performance? (2) Do for-profit plans behave differently than nonprofits do? (3) What other factors are associated with variation in plan performance? We find, first, that more profitable plans achieve higher quality scores in subsequent years. Profits may enable a plan to pursue higher quality of care and invest in better management systems. Second, there is little systematic evidence that for-profit plans have different HEDIS scores than not-for-profits have. (+info)
Family planning clinic services in the United States: patterns and trends in the late 1990s.
(16/263)
CONTEXT: Publicly funded family planning clinics are a vital source of contraceptive and reproductive health care for millions of U.S. women. It is important periodically to assess the number and type of clinics and the number of contraceptive clients they serve. METHODS: Service data were requested for agencies and clinics providing publicly funded family planning services in the United States in 1997. The numbers of agencies, clinics and female contraceptive clients were tabulated according to various characteristics and were compared with similar data for 1994. Finally, county data were tabulated according to the presence of family planning clinics and private physicians likely to provide family planning care and according to the number of female contraceptive clients served compared with the number of women needing publicly funded care. RESULTS: In 1997, 3,117 agencies offered publicly funded contraceptive services at 7,206 clinic sites. Forty percent of clinics were run by health departments, 21% by community health centers, 13% by Planned Parenthood affiliates and 26% by hospitals or other agencies. Overall, 59% of clinics received Title X funding. Agencies operated an average of 2.3 clinics, and clinics served an average of 910 contraceptive clients per year. Altogether, clinics provided contraceptive services to 6.6 million women-approximately two of every five women estimated to need publicly funded contraceptive care. The total number of providers and the total number of women served remained stable between 1994 and 1997; at the local level, however, clinic turnover was high. Some 85% of all US counties had one or more publicly funded family planning clinics; 36% had one or more clinics, but no private obstetrician-gynecologist. CONCLUSIONS: Publicly funded family planning clinics are distributed widely throughout the United States and continue to provide contraceptive care to millions of US women. Clinics are sometimes the only source of specialized family planning care available to women in rural counties. However, the high rate of clinic tumover and the lack of significant growth in clinic numbers suggest that limited funding and rising costs have hindered the further expansion and outreach of the clinic network to new geographic areas and hard-to-reach populations. (+info)