AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
WASHINGTON -- Managed care plans and accrediting bodies have started to incorporate elements of a Stanford (Calif.) University definition that seeks to achieve consensus in "medical necessity" decisions.
The state of Hawaii went so far as to include the definition in its new patient's rights law. "We haven't seen anything better. It's exactly what we wanted," said Chris Pablo, director of public government and community affairs at Kaiser Permanente in Honolulu.
Stanford's definition creates a framework for making treatment decisions and resolving conflicts that increasingly arise between health plans and doctors seeking treatment for patients, said Linda Bergthold, Ph.D., a research associate at Stanford's Center for Health Policy, who helped formulate the definition.
An ultimate goal is to replace a hodgepodge of vague and inconsistent definitions with a uniform national definition of "medical necessity."
The definition was conceived 2 years ago by a workshop of 20 members from the health and medical community, which convened in California as part of a Stanford research project on medical necessity decision making.
Workshop participants concluded that a model contractual definition of medical necessity should have five components: the decision-making authority; such as the health plan's medical director acting on the recommendation of the treating physician; the purpose of the health intervention; the scope of treatment to be provided; the evidence on which a decision could be based; and the use of cost-effectiveness to evaluate alternative treatments.
The evidence criterion would be used to assess existing as well as new interventions, and it explains which types of evidence would be required for each, Dr. Bergthold said.
Source: HighBeam Research, Health Plans, Others Defining 'Medical Necessity'.