Questions and answers about managed competition.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to S Woolhandler.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
New data obtained from the Census Bureau shows that the number of Americans without any health insurance increased by 1.3 million between 1989 and 1990, bringing the total number of uninsured to 34.7 million, more than at any time since the passage of Medicare and Medicaid 25 years ago. This increase coincided with a 10.5 percent increase in health spending, the second largest in the past three decades. The number of people covered by Medicaid grew by 3.1 million, due to a one-time expansion of eligibility mandated by Congress, but this was more than counter-balanced by a population growth of 3 million and a decrease of 1.3 million in people covered by private insurance. Had Medicaid not been expanded, the number of uninsured would have increased by 4.4 million. The increase in the uninsured affected virtually all parts of the nation. Seven states had increases of more than 100,000 persons each. Only Texas experienced a decrease of that magnitude, but still had the second highest rate of uninsurance of any state. Of the 1.3 million additional uninsured in 1990, 77 percent were male, 32 percent had family incomes in excess of $50,000 per year, and 74 percent had annual family incomes above $25,000. Fewer than 9 percent had incomes below the poverty line. The numbers of uninsured children and senior citizens fell slightly (but not significantly), while the number of uninsured working-age adults rose by 1.4 million. The number of uninsured workers in each of four of 20 major industry groups increased by more than 100,000 in 1990. None of the industry groups showed a significant decline in the number of uninsured. Among professionals, there were substantial numbers of uninsured doctors, engineers, teachers, college professors, clergy, and others, but all legislators and judges were insured. The data presented here largely predate the recession and understate current problems. In 1991 the number of uninsured will likely reach nearly 40 million. Also, these estimates are based on the number of people uninsured at a single time during 1990; a far higher number were temporarily uninsured at some point during the year. Moreover the Census Bureau survey ignores the problem of the underinsurance of at least 50 million insured Americans. Patchwork public programs are grossly inadequate to plug the holes. A national health program covering all Americans could assure access to care and contain costs.
The financing and delivery of long-term care (LTC) need substantial reform. Many cannot afford essential services; age restrictions often arbitrarily limit access for the nonelderly, although more than a third of those needing care are under 65 years old; Medicaid, the principal third-party payer for LTC, is biased toward nursing home care and discourages independent living; informal care provided by relatives and friends, the only assistance used by 70% of those needing LTC, is neither supported nor encouraged; and insurance coverage often excludes critically important services that fall outside narrow definitions of medically necessary care. We describe an LTC program designed as an integral component of the national health program advanced by Physicians for a National Health Program. Everyone would be covered for all medically and socially necessary services under a single public plan, federally mandated and funded but administered locally. An LTC payment board in each state would contract directly with providers through a network of local public agencies responsible for eligibility determination and care coordination. Nursing homes, home care agencies, and other institutional providers would be paid a global budget to cover all operating costs and would not bill on a per-patient basis. Alternatively, integrated provider organizations could receive a capitation fee to cover a broad range of LTC and acute care services. Individual practitioners could continue to be paid on a fee-for-service basis or could receive salaries from institutional providers. Support for innovation, training of LTC personnel, and monitoring of the quality of care would be greatly augmented. For-profit providers would be compensated for past investments and phased out. Our program would add between $18 billion and $23.5 billion annually to current spending on LTC. Polls indicate that a majority of Americans want such a program and are willing to pay earmarked taxes to support it.
OBJECTIVE: --To analyze the health insurance status of physicians, other health personnel, and insurance industry personnel. DESIGN: --The study was based on data collected by the US Bureau of the Census in the March 1991 Current Population Survey for six groups of workers in health care occupations and three classifications of insurance employees. This survey included 6182 civilian health personnel and 1498 insurance workers under the age of 65 years. RESULTS: --Of civilian health personnel under the age of 65 years, 9% (90% confidence interval [CI], 8.2% to 9.8%) are uninsured, equivalent to 834,000 persons, including 15,000 (90% CI, 5000 to 25,000) physicians. Among insurance workers, 5.1% (90% CI, 3.9% to 6.2%) are uninsured. While 6% (90% CI, 4.2% to 7.9%) of those working in physicians' offices are uninsured, 52.2% (90% CI, 48.2% to 56.3%) receive no employer contribution toward their coverage. More than a fifth of nursing home employees lack insurance coverage, as do nearly a quarter of the 1.868 million health care workers with annual incomes less than $10,000. CONCLUSION: --Nearly a million health care and insurance workers are themselves uninsured and at high risk for being unable to obtain needed care.
The Physicians for a National Health Program proposes to cover all Americans under a single, comprehensive public insurance program without copayments or deductibles and with free choice of provider. Such a national health program could reap tens of billions dollars in administrative savings in the initial years, enough to fund generous increases in health care services not only for the uninsured, but for the underinsured as well. We delineate a transitional national health program budget that would hold overall health spending at current levels while accommodating increases in hospital and physician utilization. Future national health program spending would be indexed to the growth in gross national product adjusted for demographic, epidemiologic, and technologic shifts. Financing for the national health program would transfer funds into the public program without disrupting the general pattern of current revenue sources. We suggest a funding package that would augment existing government health spending with earmarked health care taxes. Because these new taxes would replace employer-employee insurance premiums and substantial portions of current out-of-pocket expenditures, they would not increase health costs for the average American.
BACKGROUND AND METHODS: In 1983 the proportion of health care expenditures consumed by administration in the United States was 60 percent higher than in Canada and 97 percent higher than in Britain. To assess the effects of recent health policy initiatives on the administrative efficiency of health care, we examined four components of administrative costs in the United States and Canada for 1987: insurance overhead, hospital administration, nursing home administration, and physicians' billing and overhead expenses. Most data were provided by the two nations' federal health and statistics agencies, supplemented by state and provincial data and published sources. Because data on physicians' billing costs were limited, we estimated a range for these costs by two methods that rely on different sources of data. All figures are reported in 1987 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: In 1987 health care administration cost between $96.8 billion and $120.4 billion in the United States, amounting to 19.3 to 24.1 percent of total spending on health care, or $400 to $497 per capita. In Canada, between 8.4 and 11.1 percent of health care spending ($117 to $156 per capita) was devoted to administration. Administrative costs in the United States increased 37 percent in real dollars between 1983 and 1987, whereas in Canada they declined. The proportion of health care spending consumed by administration is now at least 117 percent higher in the United States than in Canada and accounts for about half the total difference in health care spending between the two nations. If health care administration in the United States had been as efficient as in Canada, $69.0 billion to $83.2 billion would have been saved in 1987. CONCLUSIONS: The administrative structure of the U.S. health care system is increasingly inefficient as compared with that of Canada's national health program. Recent health policies with the avowed goal of improving the efficiency of care have imposed substantial new bureaucratic costs and burdens.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Epidemiologists usually employ measures of variability of physiological traits such as blood pressure and cholesterol only to determine confidence intervals or statistical significance. For evolutionary biologists population variability per se has proven of interest. This article explores the applicability of this perspective to the analysis of human physiology, using data from the Framingham Heart Disease Study and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. The nonrandom patterns of variability observed suggest that examination of the degree and pattern of heterogeneity within a population may provide information not evident from the analysis of mean values.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Using criteria adopted by the US Preventive Services Task Force, we evaluated use of the dipstick urinalysis to screen for bacteriuria. When the leukocyte esterase and nitrite dipstick tests are combined, the positive predictive value for detecting bacteriuria exceeded 12% in groups with a 5% or higher prevalence of bacteriuria: women who are pregnant, diabetic, or over 60 years of age and all institutionalized elderly. Conventional antimicrobial regimens for asymptomatic bacteriuria have proved efficacious only for pregnant women. We conclude that pregnant women should be screened for bacteriuria, but with the more sensitive urine culture, because treatment prevents serious fetal and maternal sequelae. Dipstick screening may be justified in women who are over 60 years of age or diabetic. The prevalence of bacteriuria in other groups is too low to justify screening.
We review evidence on the value of dipstick urinalysis screening for hemoglobin and protein in asymptomatic adults. In young adults, evidence from five population-based studies indicates that fewer than 2% of those with a positive heme dipstick have a serious and treatable urinary tract disease, too few to justify screening and the risks of subsequent workup. For older populations, evidence is contradictory and no recommendation can presently be made for or against hematuria screening. A population-based randomized, controlled trial of hematuria screening in the elderly is urgently needed. Proteinuria screening is not recommended in any healthy, asymptomatic adult population, since four population-based studies have found that fewer than 1.5% of those with positive dipsticks have serious and treatable urinary tract disorders.
Our health care system is failing. Tens of millions of people are uninsured, costs are skyrocketing, and the bureaucracy is expanding. Patchwork reforms succeed only in exchanging old problems for new ones. It is time for basic change in American medicine. We propose a national health program that would (1) fully cover everyone under a single, comprehensive public insurance program; (2) pay hospitals and nursing homes a total (global) annual amount to cover all operating expenses; (3) fund capital costs through separate appropriations; (4) pay for physicians' services and ambulatory services in any of three ways: through fee-for-service payments with a simplified fee schedule and mandatory acceptance of the national health program payment as the total payment for a service or procedure (assignment), through global budgets for hospitals and clinics employing salaried physicians, or on a per capita basis (capitation); (5) be funded, at least initially, from the same sources as at present, but with all payments disbursed from a single pool; and (6) contain costs through savings on billing and bureaucracy, improved health planning, and the ability of the national health program, as the single payer for services, to establish overall spending limits. Through this proposal, we hope to provide a pragmatic framework for public debate of fundamental health-policy reform.
The class character of medicine is most easily discerned in the inequitable organization of health services. Capital's shaping of the patterns of disease and our medical/scientific responses is less apparent but equally strong. We illustrate this point by reviewing some recent history of cardiovascular diseases and therapies. Hitherto unknown afflictions have become commonplace. Our diagnostic and therapeutic concepts are the crystallization of a long history of scientific effort--an effort dominated and directed by capitalist imperatives. The work of the clinician rests on this scientific substrate, and recognition or rejection of its class nature provides a potential basis for a new medical science but not the needed results. The socialist transformation of medicine will require a recognition of the capitalist specificity of current science, and the painstaking construction of alternative modes of thought.
In this position paper we outline the major problems that exist in the U.S. health care system and present a proposal for addressing them. This paper contains the major health proposal put forward by the Jesse Jackson 1988 Campaign, calling for the establishment in the United States of a universal and comprehensive National Health Program (NHP) that will be federally funded and administered and be equitably financed. We also discuss how the NHP will affect patients, unions, corporations and employers, practitioners and other health workers, hospitals, and the insurance industry. Specific proposals are made for the transition from the current system to the proposed NHP, with a discussion of the major differences between national health proposals put forward by the two major Democratic contenders for the U.S. Presidency. This position paper also includes a brief appendix sketching some of the major differences between the U.S. and the Canadian medical care systems.
Recent developments in health care are strikingly congruent with a Marxist paradigm. For many years small scale owner producers (physicians) dominated medicine, and the corporate class supported the expansion of services. As health care expanded, corporate involvement in the direct provision of services emerged. This involvement is reflected not only in the rise of for-profit providers, but also in the influence of hospital administrators, utilization review organizations, insurance bureaucrats, and other functionaries unfamiliar with the clinical encounter, but well versed on the bottom line. Corporate providers' quest for increasing revenues has brought them into conflict with corporate purchasers of care, whose employee benefit costs have skyrocketed. This intercorporate conflict powerfully shapes health policy and has caused the rapid proliferation of health maintenance organizations and other forms of prospective payment. Corporate purchasers of care favor the incentives under prospective payment for providers to curtail care and its costs. For corporate providers, prospective payment has allowed increased profits even in the face of constrained revenues, because reimbursement is disconnected from resource use. Unfortunately, this corporate compromise serves patients and physicians poorly. Alternative policy options that challenge corporate interests could save money while improving care.