The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Special Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 345:1312-1317 November 1, 2001 Number 18
NextNext

Leaving Gatekeeping Behind — Effects of Opening Access to Specialists for Adults in a Health Maintenance Organization
Timothy G. Ferris, M.D., M.P.H., Yuchiao Chang, Ph.D., David Blumenthal, M.D., M.P.P., and Steven D. Pearson, M.D.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF

Commentary
-Editorial
 by Lawrence, D.

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background Gatekeeping refers to the prior approval of referrals to specialists by a primary care physician. Although many health plans view gatekeeping as an essential tool for controlling costs and coordinating care, many patients and physicians object to it.

Methods On April 1, 1998, Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates, a large, multispecialty, capitated group practice previously known as Harvard Community Health Plan, eliminated a gatekeeping system that had been in place for over 25 years. We determined the effects of opening access to specialists on visits to primary care physicians and specialists by adults. In randomly selected cohorts of 10,000 members each, we analyzed visits during 6-month periods for the 3 years before and 18 months after gatekeeping was eliminated.

Results Adults visited a primary care physician an average of 1.21 times and 1.19 times per six-month period before and after the elimination of gatekeeping, respectively (P=0.05); the average number of visits to a specialist was 0.78 per six-month period both before and after its elimination (P=0.35). There was little change in the percentage of visits to specialists included in the analysis as a proportion of all visits (39.1 percent before the elimination of gatekeeping and 39.5 percent afterward). The percentage of first visits to specialists as a proportion of all visits to specialists included in the analysis increased from 24.7 to 28.2 percent (P<0.001). There were small increases in the numbers of visits to orthopedists and physical or occupational therapists. The proportion of visits to specialists for low back pain that were new consultations increased from 26.6 to 32.9 percent (P=0.01).

Conclusions In a capitated, multispecialty group practice, we found little evidence of substantial changes in the use of specialty services by adults in the first 18 months after the elimination of gatekeeping.


Source Information

From the Institute for Health Policy, Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital–Partners Health Care System and Harvard Medical School (T.G.F., D.B.); the Medical Practices Evaluation Center, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School (Y.C.); and the Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care and Harvard Medical School (S.D.P.) — all in Boston.

Address reprint requests to Dr. Pearson at the Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, 133 Brookline Ave., 6th Fl., Boston, MA 02215, or at steven_pearson{at}hphc.org.

Full Text of this Article


This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.