Suchergebnisse

Purpose. To characterize employers' coverage of clinical preventive services. Design. Mercer Human Resource Consulting Inc. included questions on clinical preventive services as part of its National Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Plans, 2001. Setting. A national sample of employers of a large, medium, and small number of employees, including governments. Subjects. Respondents self-identified as most knowledgeable about the organization's health benefits. Measures. Weighted analyses of responses to eight survey questions on health promotion. Results. The survey was completed by 2180 employers, and the response rate was 21%. More than 90% of employers included increased productivity and decreased health care costs among their most important reasons for coverage of clinical preventive services. Within health insurance, coverage of physical examinations, immunizations, and screenings generally exceeded 50%, but coverage of lifestyle modification services was less than 20%. Only 20% of employers covered tobacco cessation services, and only 4% of employers provided an "optimal" benefit. We compared employers' offerings with a published ranking, by impact and value, of clinical preventive services. We found the biggest discrepancy in tobacco cessation services and alcohol problem prevention, which ranked high in terms of impact and value but are offered by only 20% and 18% of employers, respectively. Conclusions. Employers seek financial return from their offerings of clinical preventive services to employees, but they are least likely to offer the services most likely to provide this return.

Since 2014, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has dramatically shifted the ways in which Veterans can receive care. While a substantial majority of Veteran care is provided at one of the 170 VA Medical Centers and 1074 outpatient sites of care nationwide, the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act (Choice Act) (2014) and the VA MISSION Act (MISSION Act) (2018) provided Veterans increased opportunities to receive care from community providers by partnering with federal and private providers, clinics, and hospitals. Both MISSION and Choice represented the attempts of Congress to address reports of long wait times for certain VA services, especially in parts of the country where growth of the Veteran population outpaced VA capacity and in rural areas where Veterans had to drive long distances to see a subspecialist.