Posted on 03/06/2014 5:32:04 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
"....As more people enter the A.C.A.’s new insurance exchanges, they will get to choose between a bronze plan with a narrow network and lower premiums and a platinum plan with a broader network and higher premiums. Inevitably,some insurance plans will offer narrow networks with poor-quality providers.
However,there are four ways that we could reassure Americans that they are getting high-quality care despite choosing a narrow network.
First,the exchanges should require that networks meet a minimum level of adequacy—meaning there are sufficient numbers of each type of practitioner in every geographic area. The National Committee for Quality Assurance, a nonprofit group, has already created network adequacy standards that could be applied.
Second,we need more transparency. Insurance companies should have to publish the measures they use to select their “high performing” or “efficient” networks. This will discourage them from looking at price alone. And consumers should be able to easily find which doctors and hospitals are included in a network. The size of a plan’s network should be as transparent as its premium.
Third,we need more reliable ways of measuring the quality of networks and the doctors and hospitals within them. The N.C.Q.A. or Consumer Reports could develop a grading system, from A to F. When comparing different plans, no one should have to rely on U.S. News and World Report’s flawed rankings or hearsay from acquaintances.
Finally, insurance companies—which desperately want to avoid repeating the managed-care backlash—should incorporate a “safety valve” for patients like the mother with colon cancer in Colorado. They should allow any enrollee who develops a serious condition like cancer to obtain a second opinion at a recognized center of excellence.....companies could negotiate good prices with these centers in exchange for a large volume of referrals. Patients want to know, and ought to be assured, that they are getting the best treatment possible.....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
E Z Kill
Not when it comes to “pro choice”
“Unless they’re choosing to kill babies.”
That’s not really pro-choice. The father rarely gets to choose, and the baby never does.
No kidding.
Considering what ObamaCare will do to babies victimized by those plans, even Ezekiel J. Emanuel, as an extreme leftist, should be in favor of the ObamaCare “choice”, which is a whole lot like Sophie’s Choice.
Wow...
if ONLY!!
Hey- since we pay for his healthcare, shouldn’t we get to dictate what he gets? Lol!
bkmk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.