Expansion of Private Equity Involvement in Women's Health Care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bruch JD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7445626 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Private equity (PE) investments in health care have increased drastically over the last decade, and the profit interests of these companies have triggered a vivid discussion among medical professions. However, what are the key underlying perceptions among physicians regarding this trend? Unravelling the argumentative structure of this debate is the purpose of this paper. With physicians being a major stakeholder group in the outpatient health care setting, this paper explores physicians' perspectives regarding increasing PE activities. We systematically searched, selected, and synthesized existing knowledge in a scoping review and complemented the findings through 14 semi-structured interviews with physicians working in the outpatient health care sector in Germany. The results outline a complex network of arguments, concerns, and fears whereby the first intuitive perception of physicians is of critical nature. Arguments cluster around central perceptions of how PE involvement affects the individual autonomy of physicians in their daily work and decision-making, the impact on quality of care, work-life balance considerations, PE investment strategies, lack of medical vs. managerial expertise, and taxation issues. The high number of opinion papers among the literature underlines the actuality of the topic and emphasizes the need for empirical research.
| S-EPMC9737937 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePrivate equity acquisitions of physician practices in the US have been increasing rapidly; however, the implications for health care delivery and spending are unclear.ObjectiveTo examine changes in prices and utilization associated with private equity acquisitions of physician practices across multiple specialties.Design, settings, and participantsThis was a difference-in-differences event study of US physician practices specialized in dermatology, gastroenterology, and ophthalmology that were acquired by private equity firms from 2016 to 2020. Within each specialty, each private equity-acquired (PE-acquired) practice was matched with as many as 5 control practices based on the preacquisition number of unique patients, encounters, risk score, share of services billed out-of-network, and spending. The PE-acquired practices were compared with matched controls through year 2 after acquisition, using a difference-in-differences event study. Data analyses were performed from March 2021 to February 2022.ExposuresPrivate equity acquisition of physician practices.Main outcomes and measuresMeasures of spending and utilization, including the charge and price (amount paid) per claim, new and unique patients, and total encounters.ResultsCompared with the 2874 control practices, the 578 PE-acquired physician practices exhibited an average increase of $71 (+20.2%) charged per claim (95% CI, 13.1%-27.3%; P < .001) and $23 (+11.0%) in the allowed amount per claim (95% CI, 5.6%-16.5%; P < .001). The PE-acquired practices increased their numbers of unique patients seen by 25.8% (95% CI, 15.8%-35.6%; P < .001) compared with control practices, driven by a 37.9% increase in visits by new patients (95% CI, 25.6%-50.2%; P < .001). In aggregate, their volume of encounters increased by 16.3% (95% CI, 1.0%-32.0%; P = .04) compared with the control group, with a 9.4% increase in the share of office visits for established patients that were billed as longer than 30 minutes (95% CI, 1.7%-17.0%; P = .02). No statistically significant changes in patient risk scores were found between PE-acquired practices and controls. Within specialties, we found modest differences along selected outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceIn this difference-in-differences study, private equity acquisition of physician practices in dermatology, gastroenterology, and ophthalmology were associated with differential increases in allowed amount and charges per claim, volume of encounters, and new patients seen, as well as some changes in billing and coding.
| S-EPMC9440392 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In India, despite improvements in access to health care, inequalities are related to socioeconomic status, geography, and gender, and are compounded by high out-of-pocket expenditures, with more than three-quarters of the increasing financial burden of health care being met by households. Health-care expenditures exacerbate poverty, with about 39 million additional people falling into poverty every year as a result of such expenditures. We identify key challenges for the achievement of equity in service provision, and equity in financing and financial risk protection in India. These challenges include an imbalance in resource allocation, inadequate physical access to high-quality health services and human resources for health, high out-of-pocket health expenditures, inflation in health spending, and behavioural factors that affect the demand for appropriate health care. Use of equity metrics in monitoring, assessment, and strategic planning; investment in development of a rigorous knowledge base of health-systems research; development of a refined equity-focused process of deliberative decision making in health reform; and redefinition of the specific responsibilities and accountabilities of key actors are needed to try to achieve equity in health care in India. The implementation of these principles with strengthened public health and primary-care services will help to ensure a more equitable health care for India's population.
| S-EPMC3093249 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo describe health equity research priorities for health care delivery systems and delineate a research and action agenda that generates evidence-based solutions to persistent racial and ethnic inequities in health outcomes.Data sources and study settingThis project was conducted as a component of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) stakeholder engaged process to develop an Equity Agenda and Action Plan to guide priority setting to advance health equity. Recommendations were developed and refined based on expert input, evidence review, and stakeholder engagement. Participating stakeholders included experts from academia, health care organizations, industry, and government.Study designExpert group consensus, informed by stakeholder engagement and targeted evidence review.Data collection/extraction methodsPriority themes were derived iteratively through (1) brainstorming and idea reduction, (2) targeted evidence review of candidate themes, (3) determination of preliminary themes; (4) input on preliminary themes from stakeholders attending AHRQ's 2022 Health Equity Summit; and (5) and refinement of themes based on that input. The final set of research and action recommendations was determined by authors' consensus.Principal findingsHealth care delivery systems have contributed to racial and ethnic disparities in health care. High quality research is needed to inform health care delivery systems approaches to undo systemic barriers and inequities. We identified six priority themes for research; (1) institutional leadership, culture, and workforce; (2) data-driven, culturally tailored care; (3) health equity targeted performance incentives; (4) health equity-informed approaches to health system consolidation and access; (5) whole person care; (6) and whole community investment. We also suggest cross-cutting themes regarding research workforce and research timelines.ConclusionsAs the nation's primary health services research agency, AHRQ can advance equitable delivery of health care by funding research and disseminating evidence to help transform the organization and delivery of health care.
| S-EPMC10684038 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAvoidable disparities in health outcomes persist in Canada despite substantial investments in a publicly funded health care system that includes preventive services. Our objective was to provide preventive care recommendations that promote health equity by prioritizing effective interventions for people experiencing disadvantages.MethodsThe guideline was developed by a primary care provider-patient panel, with input from a patient-partner panel with diverse lived experiences. After selecting priority topics, we searched for systematic reviews and recent randomized controlled trials of screening and other relevant studies of screening accuracy and management efficacy. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to develop recommendations and followed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) reporting guidance. We managed competing interests using the Guideline International Network principles. The recommendations were externally reviewed by content experts and circulated for endorsement by national stakeholders.RecommendationsWe developed 15 screening and other preventive care recommendations and 1 policy recommendation on improving access to primary care. We recommend prioritized outreach for colorectal cancer screening starting at age 45 years and for cardiovascular disease risk assessment, to help address inequities and promote health. Specific interventions that should be rolled out in ways that address inequities include human papillomavirus (HPV) self-testing, HIV self-testing and interferon-γ release assays for tuberculosis infection. Screening for depression, substance use, intimate partner violence and poverty should help connect people experiencing specific disadvantages with proven interventions. We recommend automatic connection to primary care for people experiencing disadvantages.InterpretationProven preventive care interventions can address health inequities if people experiencing disadvantages are prioritized. Clinicians, health care organizations and governments should take evidence-based actions and track progress in promoting health equity across Canada.
| S-EPMC10519166 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: To determine if the use of a simple self-administered Postpartum Questionnaire for Mothers (PQM) at the well-baby visit (WBV) increased the proportion of women who received health care and contraception by 6 months postpartum (PP). Methods: This was a single-site, system-level, intervention. Women were recruited from the pediatric clinic when presenting with their infants for a 2-month WBV. During phase 1 of the study, a control group was enrolled, followed by an 8-week washout period; then enrollment of the intervention group (phase 2). During phase 2, the PQM was administered and reviewed by the pediatrician during the infant's visit; the tool prompted the pediatrician to make a referral for the mother's primary or contraceptive care as needed. Data were collected at baseline and at 6 months PP, and additional data were extracted from the electronic medical record. Results: We found that PP women exposed to the PQM during their infant's WBV were more likely to have had a health care visit for themselves between 2 and 6 months PP, compared with the control group (relative risk [RR] 1.66, [confidence interval (CI) 0.91-3.03]). In addition, at 6 months PP, women in the intervention group were more likely to identify a primary care provider (RR 1.84, [CI 0.98-3.46]), and more likely to report use of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) (RR 1.24, [CI 0.99-1.58]), compared with women in the control group. Conclusion: A simple self-administered PQM resulted in an increase in women's receipt of health care and use of LARC by 6 months PP. Clinical Trial Registration: Use of a reproductive life planning tool at the pediatric well-baby visit with postpartum women, NCT03448289.
| S-EPMC8310745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this study was to develop a core set of indicators that could be used for measuring and monitoring the performance of primary health care organizations' capacity and strategies for enhancing equity-oriented care.Indicators were constructed based on a review of the literature and a thematic analysis of interview data with patients and staff (n = 114) using procedures for qualitatively derived data. We used a modified Delphi process where the indicators were circulated to staff at the Health Centers who served as participants (n = 63) over two rounds. Indicators were considered part of a priority set of health equity indicators if they received an overall importance rating of>8.0, on a scale of 1-9, where a higher score meant more importance.Seventeen indicators make up the priority set. Items were eliminated because they were rated as low importance (<8.0) in both rounds and were either redundant or more than one participant commented that taking action on the indicator was highly unlikely. In order to achieve health care equity, performance at the organizational level is as important as assessing the performance of staff. Two of the highest rated "treatment" or processes of care indicators reflects the need for culturally safe and trauma and violence-informed care. There are four indicators that can be used to measure outcomes which can be directly attributable to equity responsive primary health care.These indicators and subsequent development of items can be used to measure equity in the domains of treatment and outcomes. These areas represent targets for higher performance in relation to equity for organizations (e.g., funding allocations to ongoing training in equity-oriented care provision) and providers (e.g., reflexive practice, skill in working with the health effects of trauma).
| S-EPMC4257722 | biostudies-other
Project description:Women's Health Study Accelerometer Data
| PRJNA601249 | ENA
Project description:Women's Health Study Accelerometer Data
| PRJNA601248 | ENA
Project description:BackgroundEquitable financing is a key objective of health care systems. Its importance is evidenced in policy documents, policy statements, the work of health economists and policy analysts. The conventional categorisations of finance sources for health care are taxation, social health insurance, private health insurance and out-of-pocket payments. There are nonetheless increasing variations in the finance sources used to fund health care. An understanding of the equity implications would help policy makers in achieving equitable financing.ObjectiveThe primary purpose of this paper was to comprehensively assess the equity of health care financing in Malaysia, which represents a new country context for the quantitative techniques used. The paper evaluated each of the five financing sources (direct taxes, indirect taxes, contributions to Employee Provident Fund and Social Security Organization, private insurance and out-of-pocket payments) independently, and subsequently by combined the financing sources to evaluate the whole financing system.MethodsCross-sectional analyses were performed on the Household Expenditure Survey Malaysia 1998/99, using Stata statistical software package. In order to assess inequality, progressivity of each finance sources and the whole financing system was measured by Kakwani's progressivity index.ResultsResults showed that Malaysia's predominantly tax-financed system was slightly progressive with a Kakwani's progressivity index of 0.186. The net progressive effect was produced by four progressive finance sources (in the decreasing order of direct taxes, private insurance premiums, out-of-pocket payments, contributions to EPF and SOCSO) and a regressive finance source (indirect taxes).ConclusionMalaysia's two tier health system, of a heavily subsidised public sector and a user charged private sector, has produced a progressive health financing system. The case of Malaysia exemplifies that policy makers can gain an in depth understanding of the equity impact, in order to help shape health financing strategies for the nation.
| S-EPMC2467419 | biostudies-literature