Trust in Managed Care Organizations

, Two basic criticisms of managed care are that it erodes patient trust in physicians and subjects physicians to incentives and pressures that compromise the physician's fiduciary obligation to the patient. In this article, I first distinguish between status trust and merit trust, and then argu...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Buchanan, Allen E. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press 2000
In: Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal
Year: 2000, Volume: 10, Issue: 3, Pages: 189-212
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1826989102
003 DE-627
005 20221214052551.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 221214s2000 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1353/ken.2000.0018  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1826989102 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1826989102 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Buchanan, Allen E.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Trust in Managed Care Organizations 
264 1 |c 2000 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a , Two basic criticisms of managed care are that it erodes patient trust in physicians and subjects physicians to incentives and pressures that compromise the physician's fiduciary obligation to the patient. In this article, I first distinguish between status trust and merit trust, and then argue (1) that the value of status trust in physicians is probably over-rated and certainly underdocumented; (2) that erosion of status trust may not be detrimental if accompanied by an increase in well-founded merit trust; and (3) that under conditions of managed care the physician's commitment to traditional medical ethics cannot serve as an adequate basis for merit trust. Next, drawing on an analogy between managed care organizations and polities, I argue that (4) the most appropriate basis for merit trust in managed care is a conception of organizational legitimacy that includes procedural justice, empowerment of constructive criticism within the organization, and organizational accommodation of the noninstrumental commitment to patient well-being that is distinctive of medical professionalism. I then explore the conditions necessary for robust competition for merit trust among managed care organizations and indicate the kinds of public policies needed to facilitate such competition. Finally, I show how the account of organization-based merit trust can accommodate the special fiduciary obligation of medical professionals, without indulging in the delusion that it is the physician's fiduciary obligation always to provide all care that is expected to be of any net benefit to the patient. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |a Kennedy Institute of Ethics  |t Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal  |d Baltimore, Md. : Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1991  |g 10(2000), 3, Seite 189-212  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320481840  |w (DE-600)2009887-X  |w (DE-576)266818668  |x 1086-3249  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:10  |g year:2000  |g number:3  |g pages:189-212 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2000.0018  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/18652  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 10  |j 2000  |e 3  |h 189-212 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4230899971 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1826989102 
LOK |0 005 20221214052551 
LOK |0 008 221214||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-12-05#494A07D32BD31ADD4E1DF247CCA79A4259EE6098 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw