Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 9347454

Managing care.

Abstract

The terms 'managed care' and 'disease management' are gaining common usage in the health service but their meaning is not widely understood. Managed care is a generic term describing any health care system that integrates the financing and delivery of medical care. Its growth in the United States has been driven by pressure to control costs, and there is circumstantial evidence that costs are slowing as a result of better management of resources. However, it is not clear how much of this is due to managed care, the selection of more favourable enrollees to health plans or other factors. Research evidence is limited, and that available is constrained by the rapidly changing nature of managed care. In the United States a bewildering variety of managed care arrangements have emerged, although several common characteristics can be identified: limited choice of physician providers; controlled access to secondary care; selective contracting; financial incentives; quality management; and utilization management. All are present in the National Health Service (NHS), which exemplifies a nationalized managed care system. Disease management is an extension of managed care that takes a global approach to patient care by attempting to co-ordinate resources across the entire health care delivery system throughout the life cycle of the disease. This is poorly developed in the NHS, so that the attention of commercial organizations has been attracted. However, concern has been expressed about the implications of commercial involvement: the fragmentation of general medical services; effect of for-profit status; and use of patient-based data. Recent policy developments could allow disease management to develop within the NHS.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Q D Sandifer. 1997. Managing care.. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a024634

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A comparison of assertive community treatment and intensive case management for patients in rural areas.

OBJECTIVE: This article reviews the evidence for the effectiveness of community-based services for rural areas, specifically assertive community treatment and intensive case management. Service delivery to persons with severe mental illness in rural areas is challenged by low population densities, limited services, and shortages of professionals. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search identified six studies of rural assertive community treatment, only two of which were controlled studies, and four rural intensive case management studies, only one of which was a controlled study. Assertive community treatment would seem ideally suited to areas lacking services because of its self-contained multidisciplinary treatment team approach. However, rural programs have been forced to make several adaptations to the assertive community treatment model, including smaller teams, less comprehensive staff, and less intensive services. There is no published evidence that these adaptations are able to produce the same results as full-fidelity teams. Some believe that intensive case management may be an alternative to assertive community treatment in rural settings because intensive case management emphasizes individual caseloads, fewer staff, less intensive contacts, and brokered services. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that intensive case management programs are effective only in community settings where there is an ample supply of treatment and support services. To build the evidence base for the effectiveness of these models, much more attention needs to be focused on evaluating the current wave of assertive community treatment and intensive case management dissemination in rural areas.

Case Management↗

Factors associated with specific language impairment and later language development during early life: a literature review.

It has been reported that 50% of children with specific language impairment (SLI) have persistent SLI, which has been associated with various risk factors. To date, however, there has not been a comprehensive review of studies into different risk factors that could be used by clinicians to facilitate parental counseling and individual case-management. Several studies about the factors associated with SLI were reviewed based on study design. This article presents a review of factors associated with later language development and SLI, and reviews the risk for children who have SLI during early life. The summary provides data including specific biologic and environmental factors that are significantly associated with SLI, to ensure early intervention for children with SLI in the presence of identified risk factors.

Case Management↗