Patients' rights after health care reform: who decides what is medically necessary?
- 1 September 1994
- journal article
- Published by American Public Health Association in American Journal of Public Health
- Vol. 84 (9) , 1515-1520
- https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.84.9.1515
Abstract
President Clinton's Health Security Act entitles individuals not to unlimited health care, but to a package of defined insurance benefits with specific exclusions and limitations. Like virtually all reform proposals, it would limit covered benefits to services that are medically necessary. If health reform is to control costs, not all medically necessary care can be covered. In the absence of a generally accepted definition of medical necessity, many services will not be guaranteed to all patients unless they are explicitly covered in the federal legislation or regulations. Without a federal definition of medical necessity or regulations listing covered services, health insurance plans will retain the primary authority to decide what is medically necessary for their patient subscribers.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Do the poor sue more? A case-control study of malpractice claims and socioeconomic statusPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1993
- The overdiagnosis of Lyme diseaseJAMA, 1993
- Cancer statistics, 1993CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 1993
- Health Insurers' Assessment of Medical NecessityUniversity of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1992
- The experimental treatment exclusion clauseJournal of Legal Medicine, 1991
- Medical malpractice claims filed by Medicaid and non-Medicaid recipients in MarylandPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1991
- Physicians' attitudes toward using deception to resolve difficult ethical problemsJAMA, 1989
- What is inappropriate care?JAMA, 1988
- Ketoconazole in Early and Late Murine CoccidioidomycosisClinical Infectious Diseases, 1980
- The Need for a New Medical Model: A Challenge for BiomedicineScience, 1977