We focus on a number of topic areas identified by state health policy leaders as important to population health.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. Get the latest from thought leaders, including Christopher F. Koller, president of the Fund.
We publish The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to population health.
The Center for Evidence-based Policy at Oregon Health & Science University is a national leader in evidence-based decision making and policy design.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is an endowed operating foundation that publishes The Milbank Quarterly, commissions projects, and convenes state health policy decision makers on issues they identify as important to population health.
June 1973 (Volume 51)
June 1973 | Uwe E. Reinhardt
Students of the American health-care delivery system are generally agreed that, under its present organization, the system will be unable to accommodate any of the more ambitious national health-insurance schemes now before Congress. It is argued that the current system is actually a fragmented “nonsystem” that fails to deliver the right mix of care to the right people and at the right time. As a result, it is argued, the ealth-maintenance services received by the average American tend to be of dubious overall quality and are unnecessarily costly. To eliminate these shortcomings, a great number of reforms have been proposed, the bulk of which, however, fall into one of the following major types: (a) a shift away from the fee-for-service mode of paying for health services and toward prepayment of comprehensive health care, (b) the substitution of paramedical for medical manpower and of capital for all types of manpower, (c) the consolidation of small provider facilities (especially solo medical practices) into larger production units, and (d) the integration of provider facilities in centrally directed regional systems. In this essay, the various reform proposals that have been proposed at one time or another are explored against the backdrop of pertinent empirical research available at this time. This exploration leads to the disappointing conclusion that far too many of the proposed reorganization schemes-particularly the much touted idea of a nationwide network of presumably competitive Health Maintenance Organizations-appear to have been proffered more on the basis of intuition or faith than on the basis of convincing empirical evidence. At the risk of appearing timid and of exasperating the impatient reformer, the author concludes that a great deal more empirical information needs to be gathered on the behavior of the participants in the health-care sector and on the technical constraints under which that sector operates before one can confidently develop and follow a coherent blue-print for a reorganization of the American health-care system.
Author(s): Uwe E. Reinhardt
Download the Article
Read on JSTOR
Volume 51, Issue 2 (pages 169–222) Published in 1973
National Health Insurance and the Strategy for Change
“Medical Adversity Insurance”: A No-Fault Approach to Medical Malpractice and Quality Assurance
Get the Latest from the Milbank Memorial Fund