A Comparison of HMO efficiencies as a function of provider autonomy

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd">
  <record>
    <leader>00000cab a2200000 i 4500</leader>
    <controlfield tag="001">MAP20071505329</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="003">MAP</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="005">20080618142954.0</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="007">hzruuu---uuuu</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="008">040524e20040301usa||||    | |00010|eng d</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">MAP</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">spa</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">MAP</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">344.1</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
      <subfield code="a">A Comparison of HMO efficiencies as a function of provider autonomy</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">Patrick L. Brockett... [et al.]</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="520" ind1="8" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">Current debates in the insurance and public policy literatures over health care financing and cost control measures continue to focus on managed care and HMOs (Health Maintenance Organization). The lower utilization rates found  in HMOs have generally been attribute to the organization's incentive to eliminate all unnecessary medical services. As a consequence HMOs are often considered  to be a more efficient arragement for delivering heatl care. However , is it important to make a distinction between utilization and efficiency. In this article, the efficiencies of two major classes on HMO arragements are compared using " game-theoretic" data envelopment analysis (DEA) models. While other studies confirm that absolute costs to insurance firms and sponsoring companies are lowered using HMOs, our empirical findings suggest that, within this framework, efficiency generally becomes worse when provider autonomy is restricted. This hould give new fuel to the insurance companies providing free-for-service(FFS) indemnification plans in their marketplace contentions</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080612474</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Servicios asistenciales</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080563820</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Presupuestos</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080590567</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Empresas de seguros</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080626310</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Seguro de asistencia sanitaria</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080594794</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Asistencia sanitaria</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080579722</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Control de costes</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080568863</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Estados Unidos</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080260019</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Brockett, Patrick L.</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="740" ind1="4" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">The Journal of risk and insurance</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="t">The Journal of risk and insurance</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">Orlando</subfield>
      <subfield code="g">Volume 71, number 1, March 2004 ;  p. 1-19</subfield>
    </datafield>
  </record>
</collection>