Cited by 36Healthcare Policy and ManagementPrimary Care and Health OutcomesHealthcare cost, quality, practices

From Physician to Consumer: The Effectiveness of Strategies to Manage Health Care Utilization

Open access
Flynn, Kathryn E., Smith, Maureen A., Davis, Margaret K.·2002·Medical Care Research and Review

Abstract

Many strategies are commonly used to influence physician behavior in managed care organizations. This review examines the effectiveness of three mechanisms to influence physician behavior: financial incentives directed at providers or patients, policies/procedures for managing care, and the selection/education of both providers and patients. The authors reach three conclusions. First, all health care systems use financial incentives, but these mechanisms are shifting away from financial incentives directed at the physician to those directed at the consumer. Second, heavily procedural strategies such as utilization review and gatekeeping show some evidence of effectiveness but are highly unpopular due to their restrictions on physician and patient choice. Third, a future system built on consumer choice is contradicted by mechanisms that rely solely on narrow networks of providers or the education of physicians. If patients become the new locus of decision making in health care, provider-focused mechanisms to influence physician behavior will not disappear but are likely to decline in importance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/107755802237811

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recognizing potential resistance and obtaining strong support from key opinion leaders is essential to effective implementation of the SEIPS model.

    “Recognizing potential resistance and obtaining strong support from key opinion leaders 43 is essential to effective implementation of the SEIPS model.”

    From Work system design for patient safety: the SEIPS model (2006) · cites this paper as [43]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Flynn, K. E., Smith, M. A., & Davis, M. K.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Venue
Medical Care Research and Review
Published
2002-12
Volume
59
Issue
4
Pages
455-481
ISSN
  • 1077-5587 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6801
OpenAlex
W2115198014
Cited by
36
References
2
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medical Care Research and Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R01-AG19747, R01AG019747)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
Keywords
health care utilization, managed care, physician behavior, financial incentives, utilization review, gatekeeping, service provider selection, patient education, consumer choice, health care delivery systems, provider networks
MeSH terms
Consumer Behavior, Decision Making, Feedback, Health Services Research, Humans, Managed Care Programs, Physician Incentive Plans, United States, Utilization Review, Insurance Selection Bias, Organizational Policy, Cost Sharing, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Drug Utilization Review, Case Management, Gatekeeping

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review