Health Affairs, 23, no. 6 (2004): 32-34
doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.23.6.32
© 2004 by Project HOPE
 
New Online
 * Getting Health Reform Done
 * After the State of the Union
 * Incremental Reform
 * E-Health in Developing World
 * Most-Read Articles in 2009
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

Arnold Milstein

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.


Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati    What's this?