Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Clinton's health plan: Prudential's choice

S Woolhandler¹, D U Himmelstein

¹Center for National Health Program Studies, The Cambridge Hospital/Harvard Medical School, MA 02139.

International Journal of Health Services : Planning, Administration, Evaluation

|January 1, 1994

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

HMO profits and quality.

Health affairs (Project Hope)·2001

Same author

Does investor ownership of nursing homes compromise the quality of care?

American journal of public health·2001

Same author

Smoking and mental illness: A population-based prevalence study.

JAMA·2000

Same author

Investment of health insurers and mutual funds in tobacco stocks.

JAMA·2000

Same author

Why single payer? Why now?

Journal of the American Medical Women's Association (1972)·2000

Same author

Trends in health insurance coverage, 1989-1997.

International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation·1999

Same journal

Minority Rule: A Lethal Threat to the People's Health, Democracy, and our Planet.

International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation·2022

Same journal

The No Surprises Act: A Conservative Band-Aid to Protect Business as Usual.

International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation·2022

Same journal

Gender Variations and Inequity in Health Care Financing: Evidence from Southeast Nigeria.

International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation·2022

Same journal

Factors Impacting Life Expectancy in Bahrain: Evidence from 1971 to 2020 Data.

International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation·2022

Same journal

Climate Change and Health: Consequences of High Temperatures among Vulnerable Groups in Finland.

International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation·2022

Same journal

Intimate Partner Violence and Unmet Need for Family Planning in Selected South Asian Countries.

International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation·2022

See all related articles

President Clinton's managed competition health care reform may increase bureaucracy and reduce patient choice. Evidence does not support its ability to lower costs or improve quality, making coverage expansion unlikely.

Area of Science:

Health policy analysis
Healthcare economics
Public health administration

Background:

The Clinton administration proposed a managed competition model for U.S. health care reform.
This model aimed to restructure the healthcare system through market-based mechanisms.

Purpose of the Study:

To critically evaluate the potential impacts of President Clinton's proposed managed competition model for health care reform.
To assess the likelihood of cost containment and quality improvement under this reform strategy.

Main Methods:

Analysis of the proposed managed competition model's core tenets.
Review of existing evidence regarding competition in healthcare markets.
Assessment of the potential consequences for healthcare corporatization, patient choice, and insurance market structure.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

The managed competition model is predicted to accelerate healthcare corporatization.
Potential outcomes include increased bureaucracy and reduced patient autonomy.
Concerns exist regarding the lack of evidence for cost reduction or quality enhancement.
The feasibility of expanding health coverage is questioned due to uncertain cost containment.

Conclusions:

The proposed managed competition model may lead to a less accessible and more concentrated healthcare system.
The plan's effectiveness in achieving stated goals of cost and quality improvement is doubtful.
The proposed healthcare reform's potential negative consequences outweigh uncertain benefits.