1. In 1997, many Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) suffered a decline in the value of their stocks. One newspaper account stated, “Just when HMOs seemed to offer an answer to the intractable problem of soaring health-care the bottom fell out. Some of the industry’s biggest names are racking up losses, grappling with unexpected rises in medical bills . . .and squirming under backlash from consumers doctors and politicians” [Anders and Winslow. 1997]. Why do you think that HMOs were unable to keep their costs low? What is there about the structure of HMOs that would lead to consumer discontent? One explanation discussed in the chapter is that the shift toward managed care led to a one-time decrease in expenditures, but advances in medical technology continued, resulting in commitment growth in expenditures. This explanation implies that HMOs helped prevent rising health care costs during the 1990s, but have been unable to keep costs low due to rapid advances in technology. The structure of HMOs creates incentives for health care providers to skimp on the quality of care. HMOs used “gag rules” that prohibited physicians from discussing treatment options that were not covered by the plan, but government regulation has since banned these gag rules, allowing patients greater access to information. Medical technology creates new, and often more expensive, treatment options, which patients believe they should have. It has become increasingly difficult for HMOs to keep
The Iron triangle for healthcare consists of cost, quality, and access; these three characteristics when balanced create great healthcare. Managed Care Organizations combine the three to offer consumers with care that is appropriate for their individual needs. Our book describes managed care organizations as “the cost management of healthcare services by controlling who the consumer sees and how much the service cost” (Basics of the U.S Healthcare System, Niles). Taking a look at the history prior to the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973 (HMO ACT of 1973) the implementation has been significant in balancing cost, and quality control. Before this Act was signed in to law by President Nixon healthcare costs were determined by fee for service. A fee for service or indemnity plan is a plan that allows the provider to determine the cost of service, this fee for service plan caused for healthcare costs to increase rapidly. An example of this would be going to the doctor with neck pain, being told to stretch then receiving a bill for 25,000 dollars. As could be understood the cost of healthcare had became a problem.
It is no secret that the cost of American healthcare is becoming increasingly more expensive. However, the issue of the rising cost of healthcare and its severity needs to be recognized as a major problem. Health prices are steadily increasing in the United States, and there is no sign of it stopping. Since 1970, spending on American health care has grown 9.8%, which is a rate that is growing faster than the economy (“New Technology”.) Furthermore, health insurance premiums are also increasing at a rate five times faster than American salaries, which makes it difficult for families to afford health care coverage (Zuckerman 28). Therefore, it has become an obligation to address why the cost of American health care is soaring and to seek out a solution to lower the cost. Many would jump to the conclusion that the United States simply charges too much for their medical services, but there are deeper influences that need to be analyzed. The causes of the rising cost of health care are people not using preventive health care, the development of modern technology, and the treatments being overprescribed. A possible solution is to have preventive health care services available in clinics of low-income areas.
Expansion of the MCO model occurred with the enactment of the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973. This Act provided the foundation for managed health care and required employers with greater than 25 employees to provide and HMO offering. The Act served to counter Democratic efforts to nationalize U.S. health care and to stimulate competition within the health care market. HMO’s also began the concept of for profit health care operations. While most health care providers are not for profit (Phelps, 2011) and number operate under a for profit model. Non-profit dominates the healthcare sector based on their tax exempt status.
There have been many studies performed focusing on the rising costs of health care and some of the findings state that the rising cost of healthcare premiums is a worldwide problem. However, I believe they are higher in the U.S. In 2015, U.S. health care costs were $3.2 trillion. That makes healthcare one of the largest U.S. industries, equaling 17.8 % of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in comparison to the late 1960s; where healthcare costs were only $27 billion, or 5% of the GDP, which averaged $9,990 per person each year. The main reason for the rising cost of healthcare is a combination of government policies and lifestyles changes. Examples included lack of coverage or costly coverage, lack of available coverage for
“The amount people pay for health insurance increased 30 percent from 2001 to 2005, while income for the same period of time only increased 3 percent.” (Source: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation). The rising cost of healthcare is a huge problem in America today. In this paper I will analyze the different issues and causes for the increase in cost.
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
The purpose of the coursework is to undertake a critical analysis and an assessment of the level of competition in the insurance industry of the country of our choice. In my case, I have decided to explore the health insurance industry of the United States. One of our aims is to
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.
Increased pressure from shareholders has caused a consolidation of the industry: more mergers and acquisitions will take place over the coming years. Shaw (2011).
One of the greatest changes in healthcare in the past ten years has been the rise of managed care, much to the displeasure of many patients and physicians alike. Managed care arose out of concern about spiraling healthcare costs and was designed to encourage physicians to give patients treatments that were cost-effective out of their own financial interests. "The consumer strategy was directed at imposing some barriers to use by levying various forms of co-insurance. The most common approaches used either deductibles (where the consumer paid the first portion of the bill a technique familiar in other types of insurance) or co-payments (where the consumer paid a portion of the bill and the insurance company the rest) or a combination of both' (Kane et al 1994). Managed care has given health insurance companies an increasingly significant voice in how treatment is administered and allocated. Managed care has proliferated in the past decade despite considerable criticism of the practice of 'nickel and diming' patients as well as the considerable bureaucratic red tape it is has generated. Also, research indicates that healthy, well-insured patients tend to over-consume care without meaningful co-pays but poorer, sicker patients can be deterred even by moderate co-payments and suffer negative health consequences (Kane et al 1994). However, managed care has not gone away and is a reality that all healthcare
Less than a hundred years ago, in the late 1920’s and 30’s, almost 90% of Americans did not have health insurance (Fall of HMO’s 4). They used a variety of home remedies and when medical assistance was truly needed, they paid for it out of pocket, even incurring vast amounts of debt. This had been the case throughout history, and it changed due to an important factor, medical equipment. The industrial revolution finally caught up with the medical industry and the country saw a vast change in the scientific instruments used by physicians. These instruments required a lot of money to make and care for which caused prices to rise. Due to this massive problem, a committee was formed of health care professionals and after a 5 year study, the Committee on the Cost of Medical Care suggested that health insurance co-operatives start. These corporate medical practices became known as Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO’s) and preferred provider organizations (PPO’s), and up until the 1970’s, were an experiment to regions across the U.S. Factors that hindered health care included bullying of “money politics” from both sides of the isle as well as Presidential views and tactics as well. President Nixon first
Moving forward with the social problems issue chosen for this course, I have found two reliable resources that are underway of working out the United States health care system, seeing as how there are so many concerns and issues that patients, physicians, families, and insurance programs are facing. The current structure of the health care system has been sustained and used for years simply because it rests on its own set of reinforcing elements. These elements include: “…organization by specialty with independent private-practice physicians; measurement of “quality” defined as process compliance; cost accounting driven not by costs but by charges; fee-for-service payments by specialty with rampant cross-subsidies; delivery systems with duplicative service lines and little integration; fragmentation of patient populations such that most providers do not have critical masses of patients with a given medical condition; soloed IT systems around medical specialties,” (Mayberry, et al., 2006).
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
It was no surprise when I interviewed my English class about HMOs, that out of 13 students, seven currently having HMO coverage, 77% felt HMO healthcare inferior to traditional insurance. This group closely represents the U.S. population, as HMOs have become practically synonymous with health care and the idea that Americans are no longer receiving the quality care they received from unmanaged plans. Managed care plans have succeeded in dramatically cutting the rate at which medical spending in the United States has been growing. Does it matter that 100 years after Lincoln freed the slaves that we have found another way to trade lives for money? HMOs have introduced an innovative way to provide health services:
Access to quality care. Medical costs have risen so that employers have shifted more of the medical costs to the plan members therefore increasing the uninsured rate. Also with the rise of medical cost, employers could opt not to provide any medical benefits to their employees. This leaves the employee purchasing health and medical insurance with their out of pocket monies. The consumers have changed from an organization that provided medical services to enrollees for a prepared fixed fee to plans that make contractual arrangements with providers for services at discounted prices. In doing this the consumers get a larger range of networks