Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 8526673

Integrated cardiac care.

Abstract

In 1984 physicians at the Texas Heart Institute developed Cardiovascular Care Providers Inc, the first packaged-pricing plan for cardiovascular surgery. Under this arrangement, all services, including physician and hospital charges, are covered by a global payment package (bundled service). The resulting flat fee is lower than the sum of the individual charges. Since November 1984 the plan has been offered to the non-Medicare (less than 65 years old) population through contracts with self-insured corporations, prepaid health plans, union trusts, and foreign governments. In 1993 it was extended to Medicare patients who require coronary artery bypass grafting. Our experience has shown the plan lowers cost, increases patient access, allows payers to forecast their expenses, and streamlines the billing process, while maintaining a high quality of care and enabling patients to choose their own providers. Our success with this approach is attributed not only to the plan's simplicity, but also to the fact that it is physician directed and organ specific, involving many related specialties. Equally important keys to success include our hospital's large patient population and extensive database. Similar packaged-pricing plans have been adopted by several other cardiovascular centers. The approach is now being evaluated by Medicare in 6 other hospitals nationwide. With time, this approach is likely to become an increasingly popular reimbursement option.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G L Hallman, C Edmonds. 1995. Integrated cardiac care.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4975(95)00681-a

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Caregivers' ratings of access: do children with special health care needs fare better under fee-for-service or partially capitated managed care?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate how enrollment in a partially capitated managed care (MC) option versus the fee-for-service (FFS) system affects caregivers' ratings of dimensions of access to services among children with special health care needs (SHCN). SUBJECTS: The data were collected from telephone interviews during the summer and fall of 2002 with a random sample of 1088 caregivers of children with SHCN who qualified for Supplemental Security Income and therefore were enrolled the Medicaid program for children with SHCN in the District of Columbia. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used a 2-step procedure in which we first estimated plan choice and then constructed a selectivity correction to control for the potential selection bias linked to plan choice. We estimated the second stage equations predicting caregiver's ratings of dimensions of access as a function of the selectivity correction, the plan choice dummy variable and other exogenous variables. RESULTS: After controlling for the potential selection bias linked to plan choice and other confounding factors, we find that caregivers of children in FFS are significantly more likely than caregivers of children enrolled in the partially capitated MC plan to rate the following dimensions of access as either fair or poor: "access to specialists' care" (P < 0.01), "access to emergency room care" (P < 0.01), "convenience of the doctor's office" (P < 0.01), and "waiting time between making the appointment actual visit" (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We attribute these differences in caregivers' ratings of dimensions of access that exist between partially capitated MC and FFS enrollees to case management and care coordination services along with higher fees paid for pediatrician's and specialists' services available under MC option.

Capitation Fee↗

Coordinated care in a 'consumer-driven' health system.

High-deductible health plans--with and without spending accounts--are gaining ground. Will these evolving benefit designs complement or undermine the coordination of care for patients with chronic illnesses? Based on an October 2005 roundtable sponsored by the California HealthCare Foundation and Health Affairs, this paper discusses the implications of a changing health insurance market for the chronically ill, capitation payment for medical groups, and consumers navigating the system.

Capitation Fee↗