Utilization Review and Management: A Brief Analysis of a Growth Industry

1989 ◽  
Vol 10 (01) ◽  
pp. 33-36
Author(s):  
William B. Credè ◽  
Walter J. Hierholzer

Inpatient hospital care consumes more than 30% of health insurance dollars regardless of the reimbursement mechanism, be it standarti fee-for-service, preferred provider organization (PPO), or health maintenance organization (HMO). It is understandable that reducing these costs has become the highest priority of health care purchasers, and that utilization review and management, the process of evaluating and attempting to reduce the cost of medical practice, has become a major growth industry with providers and purchasers of health care.

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-34
Author(s):  
Steven C. White ◽  
Janet McCarty

Audiologists must carefully review a contract before enrolling with a preferred provider organization (PPO) or a health maintenance organization (HMO). Although health plans have covered hearing evaluations for many years, in response to demand, more MCOs are adding hearing aids as a benefit. Audiologists should be familiar with the various approaches to deriving reimbursement from managed care organizations (MCOs) and their obligation as network providers, or they may end up losing money if the reimbursement rate is lower than the cost of the dispensed product(s) and services that are provided.


2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 2741-2752
Author(s):  
Joyce O’Shaughnessy ◽  
Leisha A. Emens ◽  
Stephen Y. Chui ◽  
Wei Wang ◽  
Kenneth Russell ◽  
...  

We investigated first-line (1L) treatment patterns and predictors of taxane use to better understand the evolving metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) treatment landscape. This retrospective analysis of the Truven Health MarketScan® (Somers, NY, USA) Database included women with mTNBC who received 1L therapy within six months of diagnosis (January 2005–June 2015). Multivariate logistic regression models identified predictors of taxane use, adjusting for prognostic factors. A total of 2,271 women with newly diagnosed mTNBC received 1L treatment during the study period. Half received a 1L taxane (53%), more often in combination than as monotherapy (58% versus 42%), though this varied by specific taxane. Nab-Paclitaxel monotherapy increased substantially after 2010. More recent treatment year (odds ratio, 2.16 (95% CI 1.69–2.76]) and number of metastases (≥3 versus 1: 1.73 (1.25–2.40)) predicted taxane monotherapy versus combination. Having a health maintenance organization versus a preferred provider organization plan predicted less nab-paclitaxel versus paclitaxel (0.32 (0.13–0.80)) or docetaxel (0.30 (0.10–0.89)) use. More recent index year (2011–2015 vs 2005–2010) was the only predictor favoring nab-paclitaxel versus paclitaxel (2.01 (1.26–3.21)) or docetaxel (3.63 (2.11–6.26)). Taxane-containing regimens remained the most common 1L mTNBC treatments. Paclitaxel and nab-paclitaxel use changed substantially over time, with nab-paclitaxel use associated with insurance coverage.


Medical Care ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. 1043-1048 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Kerrigan ◽  
Nadia Howlader ◽  
Margaret T. Mandelson ◽  
Robert Harrison ◽  
Edward C. Mansley ◽  
...  

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 104 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 158-163
Author(s):  
Simon J. Hambidge ◽  
Sally A. Easter ◽  
Sharon Martin ◽  
Paul Melinkovich ◽  
Jeffrey Brown ◽  
...  

Objective. To determine the health care resources and perceived barriers to care of families attending free vaccine fairs. Design. A cross-sectional survey. Setting. Twelve free vaccine fairs in Denver, Colorado, in 1994. Participants. A total of 533 consecutive parents or guardians of children receiving vaccine at the fairs. Interventions. None. Measurements/Results. Survey respondents reported that their children received regular health care through a private physician or health maintenance organization (HMO) (47%), a public clinic (20%), or a hospital-based clinic (14%); 18% had no regular site for health care. Twenty-seven percent of the families carried private insurance, although less than half of these plans covered children's vaccines: 9% were enrolled in an HMO or a preferred provider organization and 13% had Medicaid, whereas 50% had no health insurance. Families who received primary care at a private physician's office (OR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.01–2.7) and those with no regular site for health care (OR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.01–4.0) were more likely than those who went to a public clinic or hospital clinic to report free vaccine as the most important reason for attending a vaccine fair. Conversely, families who received well-child care at a hospital clinic were more likely to identify no appointment needed as the most important reason (OR: 2.7; 95% CI: 1.4–5.1). Families with private health insurance (OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.05–4.0) or no health insurance (OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.1–4.6) were more likely to identify free vaccine as the most important reason for attending a vaccine fair, whereas those enrolled in an HMO or preferred provider organization identified convenient time as the most important reason (OR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.2–8.3). Families with Medicaid (OR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.3–8.3) or with no insurance (OR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.02–4.6) were more likely than were those with private insurance to identify no appointment needed as the most important reason for attending a vaccine fair. Conclusions. Most families attending free vaccine fairs have a regular source of health care. For families with private health insurance or with no health insurance, the availability of free vaccine is the major reason to bring their children to a vaccine fair, whereas for families whose insurance routinely covers the cost of childhood vaccine (HMO, Medicaid), convenience is the major determinant.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-165

Our own contracts with one health maintenance organization (HMO) state: "Physician shall agree not to take any action or make any communication which undermines or could undermine the confidence of enrollees, potential enrollees, their employers, their unions, or the public in U.S. Healthcare or the quality of U.S. Healthcare coverage," and "Physician shall keep the Proprietary Information [payment rates, utilization-review procedures, etc] and this Agreement strictly confidential." This 2.4 million-member plan spends only 74.4% of its revenues on medical care; $1 million a day goes to profits, adding to its $1.2-billion cash reserve. Its chief executive officer pocketed $20 million in a single year and holds $534 million in company stock. One secret to this success is a payment formula that binds primary care physicians' interests to the firm's. The base capitation payment barely covers the office overhead. An internist with 1500 of the plan's patients might take home more than $150,000 from bonuses and incentives, or nearly nothing. Although some of the bonuses and penalties target quality, most reward limiting care and boosting the HMO's image and enrollment. For instance, for each dollar of emergency care, the plan penalizes the doctor up to fifty cents. The new risk-sharing arrangements are not simply the inverse of fee-for-service. Instead, they are the inverse of fee-splitting. Just as fee-splitting allows doctors paid on a fee-for-service basis to profit from referring patients, so doctors under the new arrangements can profit from not referring patients.


1996 ◽  
Vol 22 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 301-330
Author(s):  
Eleanor D. Kinney

In the American health care system, payers are rapidly moving toward the use of capitation as the preferred method for paying for health care services for sponsored patients. n capitation, the payer pays a provider organization a set rate per patient to care for a group of patients. The provider organization assumes the risk of the actual costs of caring for these covered lives. The theory of capitation is that providers, by assuming risk, will have incentives to contain their costs.The provider entity that provides the care can take many corporate forms. A capitated provider can be a small group of physicians with admitting privileges at a single hospital or a complex integrated delivery network comprised of hospitals, physicians, and other health care professionals and institutions with integrated case management and data systems. Currently such integrated delivery networks assume a variety of organizational forms, ranging from traditional staff model health maintenance organizations (HMOs) in which physicians are employees of the health plan to physician hospital organizations (PHOs) in which physicians and hospitals join together for purposes of contracting with payers. Hospitals and physicians belonging to their medical staffs are motivated to form integrated delivery networks or other consolidated business organizations in order to contract with payers that seek providers willing to accept financial risk for the care of sponsored patients. Providers join such arrangements out of fear of losing patients if they do not.


2005 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Hanau

L’autore affronta il tema della allocazione delle risorse sanitarie adottando una prospettiva etico-politica di tipo solidale. In particolare, viene messo in risalto come la sanità pubblica italiana comporti una spesa a carico del cittadino sempre maggiore, soprattutto per determinate categorie di soggetti quali i malati cronici non autosufficienti. Una indagine condotta per conto dell’OMS rileva infatti che in Italia i malati affetti da patologie più gravi ricevono in proporzione meno cure dei pazienti con patologie di grado lieve/moderato. Si tratta, dunque, del cosiddetto “effetto Matteo” - mutuato dalla espressione evangelica - secondo cui “a chi ha sarà dato e a chi non ha sarà tolto anche quello che ha”. Traslato alla realtà sanitaria ciò esita nel deprecabile superamento del criterio di severità clinica quale caposaldo dell’assistenza socio-sanitaria a vantaggio di criteri economicistici rappresentati da un uso improprio del sistema di remunerazione delle prestazioni sanitarie secondo DRG, che penalizza il produttore il quale sfori il limite di budget fissato dalle autorità sanitarie, magari a motivo di una maggiore attenzione all’assistenza dei malati cronici e/o disabili. Va peraltro considerato che la medicina attuale sconta altri limiti oltre a quelli relativi alle risorse, in particolare il limite rappresentato dalla finitezza umana, di cui occorrerebbe prendere serenamente atto. L'articolo considera peraltro in modo analitico alcuni strumenti utilizzati per la valutazione dell’efficacia e dell’efficienza degli interventi sanitari (QALYs, EQALYs, UVG, UVH, ROSES), mettendone in risalto punti di forza e criticità. In definitiva, occorre riferirsi sempre ad un criterio solidaristico, adottando peraltro una rigorosa logica di cura ed assistenza personalizzate, il che consentirebbe un utilizzo ottimale di risorse. ---------- The Author faces the issue of the allocation of the health resources adopting a solidarity ethical perspective. Particularly, it is underlined that Italian health care system involve an expense more and more in charge of the citizen, above all for subjects with chronic pathologies. In fact, a survey by WHO highlights that in Italy the sick affected by serious pathologies (disability, mental disease) receive less care than patients with slight/moderate diseases: therefore, the so called “Matthew effect”. In this perspective, the “clinical severity” criterion is overcome by the economical one, the perspective payment system of health care services is utilized in improper way and penalizes the health maintenance organization that dedicate great attention to chronic sick. On the other hand, the medicine has indubitable limits: resources, but above all, the probabilistic nature of outcomes and the finite nature of man. The article considers some tools used for the evaluation of effectiveness and the efficiency of health interventions (QALYs, EQALYs, UVG, UVH, ROSES), bringing out strengths and weaknesses. Finally, it is always necessary to refer to a solidarity criterion, adopting a rigorous logics of care and personalized care: this approach would allow a better use of resources.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document