PubMed · 273830
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
L D Shumaker. 1977. Snipe hunt.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/273830/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of patient insurance status and third-party payment methods on physician immunization practices. DESIGN: Family practice physicians and pediatricians were surveyed to determine whether differences existed in office immunization practices for five childhood vaccines across insurance and payment classes. SETTING: Milwaukee, Wis. PARTICIPANTS: Of 202 Milwaukee area physicians who administer immunizations routinely, 161 (79.7%) returned the questionnaire. RESULTS: Physicians reported immunizing uninsured patients in their offices less often than patients with insurance. When insurance does not pay for immunizations, most physicians (81.6%) said that they left the decision of whether to pay for private immunizations or seek free immunizations from the city health department to the family. Physicians estimated that approximately half of their uninsured patients decline private immunizations. Some physicians (20%) who treat patients receiving Medicaid reported that they immunize patients with Title 19 coverage less often than patients with other types of insurance. No significant differences in frequency of immunization were reported for patients insured by capitated-payment health maintenance organizations, fee-for-service health maintenance organizations, or traditional insurance covering immunizations. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians reported that they do not immunize uninsured and underinsured children as frequently as insured children. Further research is recommended to evaluate the impact of Medicaid enrollment on access to immunization and to develop innovative financing arrangements to ensure that no children leave their physicians' offices without being immunized.
Workload of general practitioners plays an important role in discussions about list size and remuneration in health care systems with fixed patient lists and capitation payments, such as in the Netherlands and in the United Kingdom. Against the background of the fairness of differences in income level between GPs the question is posed to what extent differences in list size reflect differences in workload and to what extent differences in patient characteristics influence workload. Both list size and practice composition relate to the demand led character of general practice. Data collected in the National Study of Morbidity and Interventions in General Practice are used. Central to this study is a three month recording of all contacts of 161 general practitioners (and their locums, assistant GPs and trainees) in the Netherlands. For each practice a patient register has been made to relate contacts to the practice population. The participating GPs kept a detailed diary covering 24 hr a day during one week. As indicators of workload several contact rates, hours worked in practice per week (in direct patient care and in other activities) and average length of office consultations are used. Demand related characteristics have the strongest relation to the number of hours worked by GPs, particularly the number of hours spent in patient-related activities. Rates of contacts, with the exception of the office contact rate, are not related to list size, but mainly to practice composition. The average length of consultations is negatively related to list size and some characteristics of the practice population.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.