Quality of Care in Investor-Owned vs Not-for-Profit HMOs
Open Access
- 14 July 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in JAMA
- Vol. 282 (2) , 159-163
- https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.2.159
Abstract
Health maintenance organizations (HMOs) have been both derided and defended. Studies comparing HMOs with fee-for-service care have generally found similar outcomes for the average, healthy enrollee. However most,1-8 but not all,9,10 studies have found worse outcomes in managed care for vulnerable groups (ie, the seriously ill, the mentally ill, and the poor). Both patients and physicians are less satisfied with care delivered through HMOs.11-16Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- Assessing Managed Care For Children With Chronic ConditionsHealth Affairs, 1998
- The Effect of Managed Care on QualityArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1998
- Cost-Effectiveness of Extending Screening Mammography Guidelines To Include Women 40 to 49 Years of AgeAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1997
- The New Medical Marketplace: Physicians' ViewsHealth Affairs, 1997
- Does Managed Care Lead To Better Or Worse Quality Of Care?Health Affairs, 1997
- Trends: Access to Care in HMOs and Traditional Insurance PlansHealth Affairs, 1996
- Outcomes of patients with hypertension and non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus treated by different systems and specialties. Results from the medical outcomes studyPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1995
- Choice Matters: Enrollees' Views of Their Health PlansHealth Affairs, 1995
- Treatment differences and other prognostic factors related to breast cancer survival. Delivery systems and medical outcomesPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1994
- Outcomes for Adult Outpatients With Depression Under Prepaid or Fee-for-Service FinancingArchives of General Psychiatry, 1993