moon 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 1 0 年前


Third, integrated payer-provider systems have incentives to minimize the cost of care because they operate under global capitation per member.

There are grave risks that costs will be controlled by restricting choices or delaying care unless these incentives are balanced by transparent results measurement.

Proponents of payer-provider systems argue that financial integration is the fastest or best way to achieve integrated care, more attention to the full

cycle of care, and improved information sharing---all of which are

essential to value. Payer-provider systems, such as the Veterans Health

Administration, Kaiser, and Intermountain Health, have made impressive improvements, but so far mostly measured on process standards, rather

than results. More important, health plan-provider systems are not the

only or necessarily the best way to increase value, and they do carry significant risks.

Integrated payer-provider systems have a role in a value-based system, but must meet a high standard of results transparency at the medical condition level。 Independent providers and physicians must comprise a major part of the system so that there is adequate competition and results measurement in the care for medical conditions.


1 個解答

  • 1 0 年前


    在那裡是墳墓風險那個費用將是支配下以限制選擇 耽擱介意除非這些動機是均衡以透明結果測定法.

    建議者的支付者-提供者系統爭辯那個金融財政整合是這緊的 最好方法到達到整合的介意, 更多注意到這fullcycle的介意, 和改良的資訊分享---所有哪個是

    對估價不可缺少. 支付者-提供者系統,諸如老兵健康

    管理,皇帝,和Intermountain健康,製造了令人深刻印象的改進,但遠主要地測量在過程標準,ratherthan結果. 更重要的是,健康計畫-提供者系統不是

    僅僅 必然地最好的方法增加價值,和他們確實攜重要的風險.

    整合的支付者-提供者系統有一角色在一價值-立基於系統, 但是必須遇見一高的標準的結果透明在這醫學狀況水平線。 獨立的供給者和醫生必須包含一較大部份的這系統那麼那個在那裡是適量角逐和結果測定法在這介意為了醫學狀況.

    參考資料: 自己
    • 登入以對解答發表意見