Two Wrongs Do Not Make a Right: Flaws in Alternatives to Fee-for-Service Payment Plans Do Not Mean Fee-for-Service Is a Good Solution to Rising Prices; Comment on “Fee-for-Service Payment - An Evil Practice That Must Be Stamped Out?”
نویسندگان
1 Health Policy & systems Research Project (Knowledge Translation Platform), Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria
2 Health Policy & systems Research Project (Knowledge Translation Platform), Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria
3 Department of Banking & Finance, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria
4 Department of Medical Microbiology/Parasitology, Faculty of Clinical Medicine, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria
5 Health Policy & systems Research Project (Knowledge Translation Platform), Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria
6 National Obstetrics Fistula Centre, Abakaliki, Nigeria
7 Health Policy & systems Research Project (Knowledge Translation Platform), Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria
doi
10.15171/ijhpm.2015.94چکیده
Professor Naoki Ikegami’s “Fee-for-service payment – an evil practice that must be stamped out” summarizes many of the failings of alternatives to fee-for-service (FFS) payment systems. His article also offers several suggestions for improving FFS systems. However, even powerful arguments against many of the alternatives to FFS, does not make a convincing argument for FFS systems. In addition, there are significant misunderstandings in Professor Ikegami’s presentation of and use of United States payment methods, the role of private vs. public insurance systems, and the increasing role of “accountable care organizations.”
