Health Affairs, 23, no. 6 (2004): 32-34 doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.23.6.32 © 2004 by Project HOPE	New Online   House Health Reform Bill   Paying for Reform   Vetting AHIP's Report   HIV/AIDS Costs   Brief: Insurance Reform   HA Blog Top 10

This Article Full Text (HTML) Reprint (PDF) Submit a response to this article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services E-mail this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Archive Download to Citation Manager Reprints & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Milstein, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Milstein, A. Related Collections Health Reform Business Of Health Consumer Issues Insurance Market

Consolidation

PERSPECTIVE

Hot Potato Endgame

Other stakeholders and events will influence whether health insurers’ current postmerger prosperity will lead to U.S. health benefit programs that are predominantly sponsored by the private or public sectors. Large employers are encouraging three complementary health benefit innovations to improve the affordability and quality, or "efficiency," of clinical services: portable spending accounts, provider pay-for-performance, and tiered plans. If health insurers prefer private-sector health benefit sponsorship, they will need to implement these innovations robustly, despite the risks they pose to insurers’ current but predictably temporary prosperity. Clinical efficiency gains can also sustain access to biomedical innovations for low- and moderate-income Americans.

                      What's this?