Because the optimal level of medical malpractice liability depends on the incentives provided by the health insurance system, the rise of managed care in the 1990s may affect the relationship between liability reform and defensive medicine. In this paper, we assess empirically the extent to which managed care and liability reform interact to affect the cost of care and health outcomes of elderly Medicare beneficiaries with cardiac illness. Malpractice reforms that directly reduce liability pressure - such as caps on damages - reduce defensive practices both in areas with low and with high levels of managed care enrollment. In addition, managed care and direct reforms do not have long-run interaction effects that are harmful to patient health. However, at least for patients with less severe cardiac illness, managed care and direct reforms are substitutes, so the reduction in defensive practices that can be achieved with direct reforms is smaller in areas with high managed care enrollment. We consider some implications of these results for the current debate over the appropriateness of extending malpractice liability to managed care organizations.

Health care report cards - public disclosure of patient health outcomes at the level of the individual physician and/or hospital - may address important informational asymmetries in markets for health care, but they may also give doctors and hospitals incentives to decline to treat more difficult, severely ill patients. Whether report cards are good for patients and for society depends on whether their financial and health benefits outweigh their costs in terms of the quantity, quality, and appropriateness of medical treatment that they induce. Using national data on Medicare patients at risk for cardiac surgery, we find that cardiac surgery report cards in New York and Pennsylvania led both to selection behavior by providers and to improved matching of patients with hospitals. On net, this led to higher levels of resource use and to worse health outcomes, particularly for sicker patients. We conclude that, at least in the short run, these report cards decreased patient and social welfare.

Medical Necessity was not a problematic issue when remote third party payers rarely challenged physicians' decisions and reimbursed physicians for whatever procedures they chose to order and perform. Over the past several decades, the term medical necessity has served as an innocuous placeholder, enabling insurance plans and physicians to make judgments about coverage that were usually unchallenged. The fact that individual physicians practiced differently and that some practice variation may be inappropriate was revealed by the path breaking work of John Wennberg, MD and colleagues at Dartmouth Medical School. Awareness of these differences, combined with rising costs, drew attention to the way decisions were being made. Until recently, neither consumers nor their physicians were fully aware of the power of the term medical necessity to deny care. The idiosyncratic way that coverage decisions are made in health care organizations has led to variation that creates inequity for consumers, greater cause for appeal of denials, and more litigation.

The California HealthCare Foundation funded research at Stanford University's Center for Health Policy to help clarify the coverage decision making process and to identify variation in the way medical necessity is defined and used in making coverage decisions in California. This information was intended to help promote greater clarity and consistency in decision making and to reduce conflict and litigation.

This timely volume provides a state-of-the-art review of all research to date on evaluating the cost-effectiveness of HIV prevention programs. Chapters feature comprehensive discussions on both scientific and practical uses - and limitations - of current studies. Addressing key questions about allocating scarce resources to HIV prevention, the Handbook is essential for those who require the most up-to-date research on the methods, findings, and practical uses of economic evaluations. A special feature is the inclusion of helpful tables summarizing the relevant literature.

In this classic book, Professor Victor Fuchs draws on his deep understanding of the strengths and limitations of economics and his intimate knowledge of health care institutions to help readers understand the problems every nation faces in trying to allocate health resources efficiently and equitably. Six complementary papers dealing with national health insurance, poverty and health, and other policy issues, including his 1996 presidential address to the American Economic Association, accompany the original 1974 text.

Health professionals, policy makers, social scientists, students and concerned citizens will all benefit from this highly readable, authoritative, and nuanced discussion of the difficult choices that lie ahead.

This book presents cutting edge thinking on the management of health care organizations. Practical and conceptual skills are taught to help students focus on more efficient health care delivery. Also covered is development of leadership skills, future trends in health care management, guidelines for designing effective work groups and a section on managing conflict.