Is Gatekeeping Better Than Traditional Care?
- 26 November 1997
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in JAMA
- Vol. 278 (20) , 1677-1681
- https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1997.03550200053031
Abstract
Context. —Nearly all managed care plans rely on a physician "gatekeeper" to control use of specialty, hospital, and other expensive services. Gatekeeping is intended to reduce costs while maintaining or improving quality of care by increasing coordination and prevention and reducing duplicative or inappropriate care. Whether gatekeeping achieves these goals remains largely unproven. Objective. —To assess physicians' attitudes about the effects of gatekeeping compared with traditional care on administrative work, quality of patient care, appropriateness of resource use, and cost. Design. —Cross-sectional survey of primary care physicians Setting. —Outpatient facilities in metropolitan Boston, Mass. Participants. —All physicians who served as both primary care gatekeepers and traditional Blue Cross/Blue Shield providers for the employees of Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. Of the 330 physicians surveyed, 202 (61%) responded. Outcomes Measures. —Physician ratings of the effects of gatekeeping on 21 aspects of care, including administrative work, physician-patient interactions, decision making, appropriateness of resource use, cost, and quality of care. Results. —Physicians reported that gatekeeping (compared with traditional care) had a positive effect on control of costs, frequency, and appropriateness of preventive services and knowledge of a patient's overall care (P<.001). They also felt that gatekeeping increased paperwork and telephone calls and negatively affected the overall quality of care, access to specialists, ability to order expensive tests and procedures, freedom in clinical decisions, time spent with patients, physicianpatient relationships, and appropriate use of hospitalizations and laboratory tests (P<.001). Overall, 32% of physicians rated gatekeeping as better than traditional care, 40% the same, 21% gatekeeping as worse, and 7% were of mixed opinion. Positive ratings of gatekeeping were associated with fewer years in clinical practice, generalist training, and experience with gatekeeping and health maintenance organization plans. Conclusions. —Physicians identified both positive and negative effects of gatekeeping. Overall, 72% of physicians thought gatekeeping was better than or comparable to traditional care arrangements.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- The wizard and the gatekeeper: of castles and contractsBMJ, 1995
- Primary Care, Financing and Gatekeeping in Western EuropeFamily Practice, 1994
- Gatekeeping Revisited — Protecting Patients from OvertreatmentNew England Journal of Medicine, 1992
- Should the Health Care Forest Be Selectively Thinned by Physicians or Clear Cut by Payers?Annals of Internal Medicine, 1991
- A Survey of the Attitudes of Physician Specialists Toward Capitation-Based Health Plans with Primary Care GatekeepersQRB - Quality Review Bulletin, 1990
- Effect of a gatekeeper plan on health services use and charges: a randomized trial.American Journal of Public Health, 1989
- Pity the poor gatekeeper: a transatlantic perspective on cost containment in clinical practice.BMJ, 1989
- Emergency room use and primary care case management: evidence from four Medicaid demonstration programs.American Journal of Public Health, 1989
- Does the Primary-Care Gatekeeper Control the Costs of Health Care?New England Journal of Medicine, 1983
- A REVIEW OF GOODNESS OF FIT STATISTICS FOR USE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF LOGISTIC REGRESSION MODELS1American Journal of Epidemiology, 1982