PubMed · 12296274
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
S Beenstock. Time share.. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns.15.46.18.s36
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Numerous mechanisms have been introduced to deliver prescription drug benefits while controlling pharmaceutical costs. An understanding of the most prominent mechanisms of benefit management is an important step in determining the most effective approach to take in future years. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this review were to illustrate the mechanisms by which managed care has attempted to efficiently and equitably deliver pharmacy benefits and to discuss the impact of such programs, including consumer cost sharing. METHODS: A review of the literature was conducted using the PreMedline and MEDLINE databases from the years 1966 to 2002, reference lists from relevant articles, and online sources, including news releases, conference materials, and pharmacy benefit management reports. RESULTS: Numerous pharmacy benefit management tools and their impact on utilization, expenditures, and health outcomes are reviewed, including disease state management; utilization management (ie, quantity limitations and prior authorization); drug utilization review; formulary management (ie, open and closed); delivery systems (ie, retail and mail order); and mechanisms for implementing consumer cost sharing (ie, generic incentives, multitiered copayments, and co-insurance). Although there is some evidence to suggest that certain benefit management tools have been successful in reducing health plan expenditures, a more thorough investigation of their potential unintended consequences is needed. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing adequate levels of consumer cost sharing is necessary if employers and health plans are to continue offering prescription drug benefits. It is important to remember, however, that quality health care cannot be forfeited for the sake of short-term cost savings.
Since the 1980s, a number of health system interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa have targeted urban areas, reflecting increasing attention to the contextual contrasts between urban and rural health settings. This article compares attempts in two projects-in Zambia and Tanzania-to strengthen urban primary health care in the public sector and make it more inclusive in a dual sense: making quality services more accessible to the poor; and fostering community involvement in health care and health-related activity. The paper reveals that the projects have produced many similar outcomes (both positive and negative), despite differences in their managerial arrangements. After identifying issues that may need to be considered in other health initiatives, the discussion revisits the urban/rural dimension of health care in relation to three key aspects: the by-passing of primary services, community participation and inter-sectoral action.