Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Gatekeeping”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1987

The gatekeeping funnel: tracking a major PSA campaign from distribution through gatekeepers to target audience.

This article presents the gatekeeping funnel as a model of the process that a public service announcement (PSA) goes through from distribution until it reaches its target audience. Process measures such as bounceback postcards, the Broadcast Advertisers Report (BAR), and analysis of audience response are suggested as ways of monitoring this funneling process. The model is then applied to the National Cancer Institute's PSA campaign designed to promote cancer prevention awareness. Three waves of PSAs were distributed between March 1984 and May 1985. Two of these waves of PSAs were targeted to the general public and the third wave was targeted to black audiences. Bounceback postcards, BAR data, and the Cancer Information Service (CIS) call data exemplify the gatekeeping funnel model described in the article. When the messages were distributed, they had the potential of reaching 170 million adults with televisions. BAR data show that the gatekeeping function narrowed the number of people potentially exposed to the messages to 24 million, or 14% of the total. Yet only 144,000 people, or less than one-tenth of 1% responded to the messages by calling the CIS number and asking about cancer prevention. This analysis may help PSA campaign planners to develop more realistic expectations for message effects.

Black or African American↗
PubMed2001

Switching to gatekeeping: changes in expenditures and utilization for children.

BACKGROUND: Gatekeeping has been a central strategy in the cost-containment initiatives of managed care organizations. Little empirical research describes the impact of switching into a gatekeeping plan on health care expenditures and utilization for children. OBJECTIVE: To determine the likelihood of a parent with a chronically ill child enrolling in a health plan with gatekeeping, as well as the effects of gatekeeping on health care expenditures and utilization for children, especially those with chronic conditions. DESIGN: We followed a cohort of 1839 children who either voluntarily switched to a gatekeeping plan or remained in an indemnity plan from 1991 through 1994. Study participants were children of employees of a large hospital. The gatekeeping plan was virtually identical to the previous indemnity plan except for lower monthly employee contribution and the requirement for a primary care physician to preapprove subspecialty referrals. We determined the likelihood of a household containing a child with a chronic condition enrolling in the gatekeeping plan, as well as mean annual total, subspecialty, and primary care expenditures and utilization for all children and children with chronic conditions. RESULTS: Households switching to gatekeeping were less likely to have children with chronic illness (8% vs 15%). Total and subspecialty expenditures for all children decreased more in the gatekeeping group (53% and 59%, respectively) than in the indemnity group (11% and 6%, respectively). For children with chronic conditions, mean visits to subspecialists decreased 57% in the gatekeeping group but increased 31% in the indemnity group. Mean visits to primary care physicians decreased 23% in the gatekeeping group compared with 13% in indemnity group. CONCLUSION: Parents of children with a chronic condition were much less likely than other parents to switch to a gatekeeping plan. Switching to gatekeeping was associated with reduced visits to specialists but did not increase the involvement of primary care physicians in the management of children with chronic conditions. The implications of these findings for the health of children are unknown.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Is gatekeeping better than traditional care? A survey of physicians' attitudes.

CONTEXT: Nearly all managed care plans rely on a physician "gatekeeper" to control use of specialty, hospital, and other expensive services. Gatekeeping is intended to reduce costs while maintaining or improving quality of care by increasing coordination and prevention and reducing duplicative or inappropriate care. Whether gatekeeping achieves these goals remains largely unproven. OBJECTIVE: To assess physicians' attitudes about the effects of gatekeeping compared with traditional care on administrative work, quality of patient care, appropriateness of resource use, and cost. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of primary care physicians SETTING: Outpatient facilities in metropolitan Boston, Mass. PARTICIPANTS: All physicians who served as both primary care gatekeepers and traditional Blue Cross/Blue Shield providers for the employees of Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. Of the 330 physicians surveyed, 202 (61%) responded. OUTCOMES MEASURES: Physician ratings of the effects of gatekeeping on 21 aspects of care, including administrative work, physician-patient interactions, decision making, appropriateness of resource use, cost, and quality of care. RESULTS: Physicians reported that gatekeeping (compared with traditional care) had a positive effect on control of costs, frequency, and appropriateness of preventive services and knowledge of a patient's overall care (P<.001). They also felt that gatekeeping increased paperwork and telephone calls and negatively affected the overall quality of care, access to specialists, ability to order expensive tests and procedures, freedom in clinical decisions, time spent with patients, physician-patient relationships, and appropriate use of hospitalizations and laboratory tests (P<.001). Overall, 32% of physicians rated gatekeeping as better than traditional care, 40% the same, 21% gatekeeping as worse, and 7% were of mixed opinion. Positive ratings of gatekeeping were associated with fewer years in clinical practice, generalist training, and experience with gatekeeping and health maintenance organization plans. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians identified both positive and negative effects of gate-keeping. Overall, 72% of physicians thought gatekeeping was better than or comparable to traditional care arrangements.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2003

Does gatekeeping control costs for privately insured children? Findings from the 1996 medical expenditure panel survey.

OBJECTIVE: Gatekeeping requirements were widely adopted by health insurers in an attempt to control costs in the mid-1990s, but empirical evidence demonstrating decreased health expenditures for children enrolled in such plans is lacking. METHODS: We analyzed data from 3254 children with private health insurance sampled in the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) to compare total per capita health expenditures among gatekeeping versus indemnity plan enrollees. This sample represents 40.4 million privately insured American children. Total expenditures were defined as payments from all sources, including third-party and out-of-pocket payments, but excluding administrative costs. MEPS data are based on information provided by patients, health care providers, and hospitals. Gatekeeping plans included all children enrolled in health maintenance organizations or other plans requiring a primary care gatekeeper. All others were considered indemnity plan enrollees. RESULTS: Mean total per capita annual expenditures for children in gatekeeping versus indemnity plans differed by <1% (887 dollars vs 881 dollars, respectively). Third-party payments by gatekeeping plans on behalf of their beneficiaries were 636 dollars versus 595 dollars by indemnity plans. Out-of-pocket payments were on average 62 dollars less for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. After multivariate adjustment, mean per capita expenditures were approximately 4% lower for gatekeeping enrollees than for indemnity enrollees. CONCLUSION: In 1996, total per capita annual health expenditures for children in gatekeeping plans were approximately 8 dollars less than for those in indemnity plans. These data indicate that gatekeeping is not an effective cost-containment method for children.

Child↗
PubMed2002

Effects of removing gatekeeping on specialist utilization by children in a health maintenance organization.

BACKGROUND: The "gatekeeping" model of access to specialty care has been an essential managed care tool, intended to control costs of care and promote coordination between generalists and specialists. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of removing gatekeeping on specialist utilization. METHODS: A capitated multispecialty group discontinued a gatekeeping system on April 1, 1998. We assessed the overall number and distribution of patient visits to primary care physicians and specialists and initial patient visits to specialists before and after the removal of gatekeeping. We performed focused analyses for specific specialties, children with chronic conditions, and children with specific diagnoses. RESULTS: Elimination of gatekeeping was not associated with changes in the mean number of visits to specialists (0.28 visits per 6 months before and after gatekeeping was removed) or the percentage of all child visits to specialists (11.6% vs 12.1%; 95% confidence interval, 11.3%-11.9% vs 11.8%-12.4%). The proportion of all specialist visits that were initial consultations increased after gatekeeping was removed, from 30.6% (95% CI, 29.4%-31.8%) to 34.8% (95% CI, 33.6%-36.1%). Visits to any specialist by children with chronic conditions increased from 18.6% (95% CI, 17.7%-19.1%) to 19.8% (95% CI, 19.0%-20.7%). New patient visits to specialists by children with chronic conditions as a proportion of all specialist visits increased from 28.1% (95% CI, 25.9%-30.2%) to 32.3% (95% CI, 30.1%-34.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Replacing a gatekeeping system with open access to all specialty physicians in a managed care organization resulted in minimal changes on the utilization of specialists. Visits to specialists by children with chronic conditions increased after the removal of gatekeeping.

Allergy and Immunology↗
PubMed2003

Is the prevalence of gatekeeping in a community associated with individual trust in medical care?

BACKGROUND: Consumer concerns about the restrictions of managed care may lead to distrust. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether a community's level of gatekeeping activity is associated with an individual's trust in medical care. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort (N = 49,929). SUBJECTS: Participants in a nationally representative sample derived from the Community Tracking Survey who had health insurance, had a usual source of care, made at least 1 physician visit, and resided in one of the sampled metropolitan areas with corresponding community-level data, including the prevalence of gatekeeping activity. MEASURES: Four questions measuring trust in physician. RESULTS: Individuals from communities with a higher prevalence of gatekeeping activity report less trust than individuals from areas with a lower prevalence of gatekeeping activity, after adjusting for whether that individual had a health plan with a gatekeeper requirement. For example, in communities with the highest prevalence of gatekeeping activity relative to the lowest, the odds ratio for individuals to agree strongly that they trusted their doctor to put their medical needs above all other considerations was 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.84). Also, a higher prevalence of gatekeeping in the community was positively associated with the perception that a physician was strongly influenced by insurance company rules when making decisions about medical care. Conversely, a higher prevalence of gatekeeping in the community was negatively associated with the perception that a doctor might perform an unnecessary test or procedure and with concern about restricted referral for specialty care. CONCLUSION: Individuals' trust in their physicians may be influenced by wider contextual variables, like the prevalence of gatekeeping in the community.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

The role of the primary care physician in the Israeli health care system as a 'gatekeeper'--the viewpoint of health care policy makers.

The aim of the study was to determine the attitudes of policy makers in the health care system in Israel to a change in the role of primary care physicians (PCP) and to ascertain the conditions under which they would be ready to adopt the model of PCP as gatekeeper. The study design was qualitative, with analyses of in-depth structured interviews of 20 policy makers from the Ministry of Health, the Sick Funds' central administrations and the Israel Medical Association (IMA) central office. The majority of the respondents claim that they want highly trained PCPs (family physicians, pediatricians and internals) to play a central role in the health care system. They should be co-ordinators, highly accessible and should be able to weigh cost considerations. However, only about half of the respondents support a full gatekeeper model and most of them think that the gatekeeper concept has a negative connotation. They also feel that it would be difficult to implement regulations regarding primary care. The barriers to implementation of the gatekeeper model, as cited by the respondents include loss of faith in PCPs by the general population, dearth of PCPs with adequate training, low stature, lack of availability on a 24-h basis, resistance by specialists, strong competition between the sick funds including promises of direct access to specialists, the medical care habits of the general population many of whom do not settle for only one opinion, and a declared anti-gatekeeper policy by one of the sick funds. Ways to overcome these obstacles include implementation of fundholding clinics, patient education on the importance of having a personal physician, appropriate marketing by family medicine and primary care advocates, and continued training in primary care. Israeli health care policy makers have an ambivalent attitude to strengthening the role of primary care. In theory, they profess support for placing primary care physicians in a central role in the health care system. However, in practice almost half oppose the full gatekeeper model. Therefore, introduction of a gatekeeper model into the Israeli health care system should be implemented gradually, based on incentives rather than regulations. Furthermore, the idea should be marketed by the primary care physicians' professional organizations, the Ministry of Health and the sick funds to physicians as well as to patients, in order to garner their support. In light of the broad consensus that competent primary care physicians are the basis for implementation of the gatekeeper model, board certification should be gradually required by employers of primary care physicians. The process of training physicians currently working in the system should be encouraged and supported by the Ministry of Health. Given the existing opposition of policy makers to giving primary care physicians exclusive referral rights to specialists, the current policy of direct access to a limited number of specialties should be continued but not extended to other specialties.

Administrative Personnel↗
PubMed2000

Does general practitioner gatekeeping curb health care expenditure?

OBJECTIVES: It is generally assumed that health care systems in which specialist and hospital care is only accessible after referral by a general practitioner (GP) have lower total health care costs. In this study, the following questions were addressed: do health care systems with GPs acting as gatekeepers to specialized care have lower health care expenditure than those with directly accessible specialist care? Does health care expenditure increase more rapidly in countries without a referral system than in those with the GP acting as a gatekeeper? METHODS: Multiple regression analyses on total and ambulatory health care expenditure in 18 OECD countries. RESULTS: Analyses showed only one statistically significant effect (P < 0.05) in countries with gatekeeping GPs: ambulatory care expenditure has increased more slowly than in non-gatekeeping systems. No significant effects of gatekeeping were found on the level of ambulatory care costs, or on the level or growth of total health care expenditure. As in earlier studies, the most important factor influencing aggregate health care costs and their growth is gross national product (GNP), followed by the share of public funding. Relationships that exist at a micro level (such as lower costs with a gatekeeping primary care doctor) did not show up in aggregate data at a macro level. CONCLUSIONS: Gatekeeping systems appear to be better able to contain ambulatory care expenditure. More research is necessary to understand micro level mechanisms and to distinguish the effects of gatekeeping from other structural aspects of health care systems.

Cost Control↗
PubMed2001

Leaving gatekeeping behind--effects of opening access to specialists for adults in a health maintenance organization.

BACKGROUND: Gatekeeping refers to the prior approval of referrals to specialists by a primary care physician. Although many health plans view gatekeeping as an essential tool for controlling costs and coordinating care, many patients and physicians object to it. METHODS: On April 1, 1998, Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates, a large, multispecialty, capitated group practice previously known as Harvard Community Health Plan, eliminated a gatekeeping system that had been in place for over 25 years. We determined the effects of opening access to specialists on visits to primary care physicians and specialists by adults. In randomly selected cohorts of 10,000 members each, we analyzed visits during 6-month periods for the 3 years before and 18 months after gatekeeping was eliminated. RESULTS: Adults visited a primary care physician an average of 1.21 times and 1.19 times per six-month period before and after the elimination of gatekeeping, respectively (P=0.05); the average number of visits to a specialist was 0.78 per six-month period both before and after its elimination (P=0.35). There was little change in the percentage of visits to specialists included in the analysis as a proportion of all visits (39.1 percent before the elimination of gatekeeping and 39.5 percent afterward). The percentage of first visits to specialists as a proportion of all visits to specialists included in the analysis increased from 24.7 to 28.2 percent (P<0.001). There were small increases in the numbers of visits to orthopedists and physical or occupational therapists. The proportion of visits to specialists for low back pain that were new consultations increased from 26.6 to 32.9 percent (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In a capitated, multispecialty group practice, we found little evidence of substantial changes in the use of specialty services by adults in the first 18 months after the elimination of gatekeeping.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

The effect of primary care gatekeepers on the management of patients with chest pain.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with chest pain referred to a cardiologist from a gatekeeper managed care organization differ from those referred from an open-access managed care organization. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study using clinical and claims data from a cardiac network database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed data from 1414 patients with chest pain or angina who were referred to a cardiologist between January 1, 1995, and June 30, 1996. We examined baseline clinical characteristics and subsequent physician practice patterns for these patients, who were referred from either a primary care gatekeeper model (n = 490) or an open-access model (n = 924). RESULTS: Although twice as many open-access patients were referred to a cardiologist, there were no differences in patient demographics or clinical characteristics at the time of referral. Cardiologists ordered similar diagnostic tests for patients from both types of managed care plans, and gatekeeper patients did not have a higher rate of abnormal tests. Rates of cardiac catheterization, coronary angioplasty, myocardial infarction, and hospitalization were similar in both groups. A significantly higher percentage of gatekeeper patients received a cardiac catheterization on the day of referral (7% versus 1%; P = .05). Open-access patients were significantly more likely to continue to be seen by a cardiologist (44% versus 28%; P < .01). Cardiology professional charges per patient were lower among gatekeeper patients ($972 +/- 1398 versus $1187 +/- 1897; P = .06), and total cardiology professional charges were significantly lower for the gatekeeper group because of the smaller number of patients seen. CONCLUSIONS: The type of cardiology services provided to patients with chest pain was not affected by the primary care administrative structure of the managed care organization, but the higher volume of patient referrals from the open-access plan may be an important consideration for cardiology practices participating in capitated contracts. The lower volume of referrals and coordination of care suggest potential cost advantages for the gatekeeper model.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Gatekeeping and referral of children and adolescents to specialty care.

OBJECTIVE: In this study we examined how gatekeeping arrangements influence referrals to specialty care for children and adolescents in private and Medicaid insurance plans. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a prospective study of office visits (n = 27 104) made to 142 pediatricians in 94 practices distributed throughout 36 states in a national primary care practice-based research network. During 10 practice-days, physicians and patients completed questionnaires on referred patients, while office staff kept logs of all visits. Physicians used medical records to complete questionnaires for a subset of patients 3 months after their referral was made. RESULTS: Gatekeeping arrangements were common among children and adolescents with private (57.8%) and Medicaid (43.3%) insurance. Patients in gatekeeping plans were more likely to be referred with private (3. 16% vs 1.85% visits referred) and Medicaid (5.39% vs 3.73%) financing. Increased parental requests for specialty care among gatekeeping patients did not explain the increased referral rate. Physicians' reasons for making the referral were similar between the two groups. Physicians were less likely to schedule an appointment or communicate with the specialist for referred patients in gatekeeping plans. However, rates of physician awareness that a specialist visit occurred and specialist communication back to pediatricians did not differ between the two groups 3 months after the referrals were made. CONCLUSIONS: Gatekeeping arrangements are common among insured children and adolescents in the United States. Our study suggests that gatekeeping arrangements increase referrals from pediatricians' offices to specialty care and compromise some aspects of coordination.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1989

Effect of a gatekeeper plan on health services use and charges: a randomized trial.

A randomized trial was conducted to determine the effectiveness of a health care plan which uses physicians as gatekeepers to control health services use and charges. New enrollees in United Healthcare (UHC), an independent practice association, were randomly assigned to the standard UHC plan requiring a gatekeeper, or to an alternate plan with equal benefits but without a gatekeeper. Individuals in both plans were similar in demographic characteristics, perceived health status, and other health insurance coverage. The gatekeeper plan had 6 percent lower total charges per enrollee than the plan without a gatekeeper. There were minor differences in hospital use and charges. Ambulatory charges were $21 lower per person per year in the plan with a gatekeeper (95% CI = -39.9, -2.1) and these were due to .3 fewer visits to specialists (95% CI = -0.50, -0.10). We conclude that a health plan which incorporates incentives and penalties for physicians to act as gatekeepers can reduce the cost of ambulatory services by limiting specialist visits.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

A model gatekeeper program to find the at-risk elderly.

This article describes the client characteristics and services needs of community-dwelling older adults found through a unique case-finding model developed at the Spokane Mental health Center. The model trains the employees of community businesses and corporations who work with the public to serve as community gatekeepers by identifying and referring community-dwelling older adults who may be in need of aging and/or mental health services. These community case-finders perform a gatekeeping function for older adults that is similar to that performed by schools and the workplace for younger persons. Information was collected on 777 individuals aged 60 and older referred over an 18-month period (January 1, 1994, to June 30, 1995) to the Spokane Mental Health Clinical Case Management Program in Spokane, Washington, which provides aging and mental health services to older adults residing in the county. Findings indicate that 40% of clients referred were found by community-based gatekeepers. Clients referred by gatekeepers were more frequently socially isolated, economically disadvantaged, and less likely to have a physician. Gatekeeper clients were also more likely to be women and to be younger than others referred to the agency. Gatekeeper clients were receiving fewer services at referral and were identified as needing more services at intake. Gatekeepers find a distinct population of community-dwelling older adults who are not found by more traditional referral sources. The need to integrate this model within a comprehensive clinical case management system is discussed.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Managed care gatekeeping, emergency medicine coding, and insurance reimbursement outcomes for 980 emergency department visits from four states nationwide.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We analyzed 980 emergency department visits for 951 patients with managed care insurance to document gatekeeping interactions and compare ED coding with professional fee billing reimbursements. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed at 12 academic and community hospital EDs in 4 states involving consecutive ED patients with managed care insurance. The main outcomes measured were gatekeeper decisions, coding levels, and reimbursement. RESULTS: Preauthorization for payment was required from managed care gatekeepers for 876 (89%) patients. Authorization was granted for 490 (56%) of these visits and denied in 176 (20%) visits; gatekeepers were not available for 210 (24%) visits. Reimbursement was initially denied for 211 (43%) of the ED visits preapproved by managed care gatekeepers. Reimbursement was initially denied for most (634 or 65%) visits, and downcoding occurred in the other 346 (35%) visits. Appeals for 560 (57%) visits resulted in a decrease in the number of unreimbursed ED visits to 193 and an increase in the number of reimbursed ED visits to 787. CONCLUSION: Preauthorization gatekeeping is not predictive of whether managed care third-party payers will initially reimburse ED visits. Overall, almost two thirds of all ED claims were initially denied, and reimbursed claims were uniformly downcoded. On appeal, reimbursement was often reinstated or increased, although billing services only appealed about half of ED visits.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Gatekeeping: a challenge in the management of primary care physicians.

Assesses the degree of self-reported implementation of gatekeeping in clinical practice, and gains insight into primary care physicians' attitudes toward gatekeeping and their perceptions of necessary conditions for implementation of gatekeeping in daily practice. A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to a national sample of 800 primary care physicians in Israel, with a response rate of 86 per cent. Multivariate analysis indicated that sick fund affiliation was the main predictor of self-reported implementation of gatekeeping, while specialty training predicted primary care physicians' attitude toward this role. Close communication with specialists, continuous medical education, and management support of physician decisions were identified by respondents as being important conditions for gatekeeping. Discusses strategies to gain the cooperation of primary care physicians, which is necessary for implementing an effective gatekeeping system.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Who needs a gatekeeper? Patients' views of the role of the primary care physician.

BACKGROUND: The primary care physician serving as a 'gatekeeper' can make judicious decisions about the appropriate use of medical services, and thereby contribute to containing costs while improving the quality of care. However, in Israel, sick funds competing for members have not adopted this model for fear of endangering their competitive stance. The purpose of this study was to examine, for the first time, the stated preferences and actual behaviour of a national sample of members of the four Israeli sick funds regarding self-referral to specialists, and to identify the characteristics of patients who prefer the gatekeeper model. METHODS: Data were derived from a national telephone survey carried out in 1997. A random representative sample of 1084 of all adult sick fund members were interviewed, with a response rate of 81%. Bivariate analysis was conducted using over all chi-square tests, and multivariate analysis was performed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: A third of all respondents prefer self-referral to a specialist, 40% prefer their family physician to act as gatekeeper and 19% prefer the physician to co-ordinate care but to refer themselves to a specialist. Independent variables predicting preference for the gatekeeper model are: living in the periphery, sick fund membership, low level of education, being male, fair or poor health status, having a permanent family physician and being satisfied with the professional level of the family physician. A significant correlation was found between practising self-referral and preference for self-referral. CONCLUSIONS.: The findings indicate the importance of surveying patients' attitudes as an input in policy formulation. The study identified specific population groups which prefer the gatekeeper model, and explored the advantages of a flexible model of gatekeeping.

Adult↗