HMOS Organization Analysis

The types of managed care are differentiated by definition, operation, structure, and information needs. `HMOs were the most common type of MCO until commercial insurance companies developed PPOs to compete with HMOs' (Douglas, 2003, p.331). `HMOs are business entities that either arrange for or provide health services to an enrolled population after prepayment of a fixed sum of money, called a premium' (Peden, 1998, p.78). There are three characteristics that an HMO must have. The first is a health care financing and delivery system that provides services for members in a particular geographic area. Second, is ensured access to a complete range of health care services, health maintenance, treatment, and routine checkups. Last, health care must be obtained from voluntary personnel that participate in the HMO. The five HMO models related to the participating physicians are the Staff

While our understanding has evolved with respect to certain advantages of MCO’s, our understanding of the disadvantages has also grown. This analysis will evaluate the use of MCO’s as a gatekeeper to controlling health care cost and offerings. It will evaluate the advantage MCO’s provide in a rapidly growing market due to the aging of baby boomers. The analysis will evaluate disadvantages that can arise with relying on MCO’s. These disadvantages work against the insurance company forcing a polarizing balance between how much control the MCO should retain over recommendation and provision of services.

Another type of managed care program that was introduced is the Preferred Provider Organization (PPO). A PPO is comprised of a group of physicians, hospitals and other medical service providers who contract with employers, insurance companies or other plan sponsors. The PPO offers discounted pricing to these contracted organizations due to the high volume of business received. PPO’s typically have up-front cost sharing in the form of deductibles and/or co-insurance, which vary depending upon the actual plan chosen.

There has been discussion to have universal healthcare system similar to Medicare as a method to have a centralized monitoring system of cost. There have also been other systems tried beginning with HMOs in the 1970s in an effort to streamline access to necessary healthcare services by employing a gatekeeper to their access at the primary care levels. With patient dissatisfaction, PPOs were tried which circumvent the necessity of referrals (Hacker, 1998). Either of these models had substantial effect on healthcare outcomes while the cost of healthcare continued to skyrocket. The US spends more than any other country on healthcare but outcomes are not better (Blackstone, 2016). In 2010, under President Obama’s leadership, Affordable Care Act was passed and one of the promising features is the formation of accountable care

HMOs are usually the least expensive health plans, offer predictable costs for health care, the least administrative paperwork, and cover preventive care (Barsukiewicz, Raffel, & Raffel, 2010). However, HMOs also restrict direct access to specialists by requiring referrals by a PCP, requiring patients to see a provider in the HMO network, and often not covering more costly procedures or care options, because care is managed to control excessive or unnecessary care. Providers gain if they provide less care (Austin & Wetle, 2012). This incentive could affect patient-provider trust.

ACO, another 3 letter health care organization consisting of integrated groups of providers, comes along promising the elusive goal of reducing health care cost, improving population health, and bolstering custom satisfaction. Sounds like a perpetual remake of a 70s movie called HMO that went through several reiterations over the past decades which gave us PPO, PSO, IDS, and the different flavors of MCOs. ACO’s hype is credited to the Affordable Care Act as it sought to reduce health care costs is by encouraging doctors, hospitals and other health care providers to form networks that coordinate patient care and become eligible for bonuses when they deliver that care more efficiently. Bottom line, providers are promised to make more if they

People are aware that managed care has caused patient free will to be lost in the sprint to cut price. Insurance companies in this sense control patients rather than self-monitoring or by a physician. One wants to make their choices. Managed care -whether in the form of HMOs, PPOs, etc., or limits on service- is an attempt by the payers (insurance companies, federal agencies or self-funded groups) to restrict payment for services and procedures the payers consider to be unnecessary

Many people are concerned about rising health care costs. In reaction to this, some individuals and companies are gravitating toward the assumed lower prices of Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) health plans. HMOs spend billions of dollars each year advertising their low cost services. While these savings look good on paper, there are many pages of small print. The explanation after the asterisk indicates that not only do the HMOs lack lower costs, but they also short-change the patient in quality care. Much of the money spent on premiums goes directly into the pockets of stockholders and less is then available for

Throughout the last half of the 20th century, employers have acted on their own to regulate health costs by requiring employees to join health maintenance organizations (HMOs). More than 100 million Americans are under managed care. However, many patients and doctors complain that HMOs impose too many regulations and sacrifice healthcare quality. HMOs are undergoing a high level of scrutiny due to criticisms that the network is controlling and jeopardizing the healthcare system of the nation.

HMO has access you can use to certain doctors and hospitals that’s in your network. The network has physicians that agreed to lower rates to plan members that

With a HMO plan, the payments for patients are generally very low. For physicians, there is a fixed precipitate payments for per person per month. For example, a 50 dollar fee may be paid per person per month irrespective of how many times the person visits that particular physician in a month. Under this system, there is a financial security provided for providers and insurers. The risk is also assumed by the providers in this

Moreover, the quality of care by MCOs (Managed Care Organizations) improved over the time with early detection and treatment compare to fee-for-service. In addition to that, more cost-effective conventional and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) aiding by HMOs (Health Maintenance Organization) which improved quality to some extent (Shi & Singh, 2015).

HMOs have been running strong for years but to remain viable they are going to have to make some changes. Considerable evidence points to physician and consumer dissatisfaction with HMO’s. Consumers are not satisfied with primary care physicians as gatekeepers, limited provider choice, physician profiling, requirement of prior approval and constraints on covered treatments (Fang, Liu, & Rizzo, 2009). Studies have shown a slight decline of the insured population covered by HMOs. In 2000-2001, 55 percent of the insured population was covered and in 2003 it dropped to 51 percent (Fang, Liu, & Rizzo, 2009).

In 1973, Congress passed the Health Maintenance Organization Act, which empowered fast development of Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs), the principal type of managed care. Managed care arrangements are broadly credited with repressing medicinal cost swelling in 1980s by decreasing pointless hospitalizations, driving providers to down their rates, and creating the health care industry to wind up more effective and focused.

HMOs multiplied rapidly with the new federal giveaways. Managed care, now including PPOs, mushroomed. Employers initially perceived managed care plans as cheaper than traditional fee-for-service insurance. Gradually, they stopped offering a choice of health plans, making individual policies more expensive. HMOs' penetration of the industry had been subsidized into existence. Government had instituted managed care. Today, while overall quality of patient care remains the best in the world, doctors practice medicine in an increasingly intricate web of rationing and regulations: Physicians are stripped of professional autonomy. As patients wander the maze of managed bureaucracy, costs rise and quality deteriorates. Every American dependent on a third party for health coverage is a potential victim of managed care. And state sponsored management of medicine