Search

This paper examines the impact of changes in the medical marketplace on medicalization in U S. society. Using four cases (Viagra, Paxil, human growth hormone and in vitro fertilization), we focus on two aspects of the changing medical marketplace: the role of direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs and the emergence of private medical markets. We demonstrate how consumers and pharmaceutical corporations contribute to medicalization, with physicians, insurance coverage, and changes in regulatory practices playing facilitating roles. In some cases, insurers attempt to counteract medicalization by restricting access. We distinguish mediated and private medical markets, each characterized by differing relationships with corporations, insurers, consumers, and physicians. In the changing medical environment, with medical markets as intervening factors, corporations and insurers are becoming more significant determinants in the medicalization process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States is the only western industrialized nation that fails to provide universal coverage and the only nation where health care for the majority of the population is financed by for-profit, minimally regulated private insurance companies. These arrangements leave one-sixth of the population uninsured at any given time, and they leave others at risk of losing insurance as a result of normal lVe course events. Political theorists of the welfare state usually attribute the failure of national health insurance in the United States to broader forces of American political development, but they ignore the distinctive character of the health care financing arrangements that do exist Medical sociologists emphasize the way that physicians parlayed their professional expertise into legal, institutional, and economic power but not the way this power was asserted in the political arena. This paper proposes a theory of stakeholder mobilization as the primary obstacle to national health insurance. The evidence supports the argument that powerful stakeholder groups, first the American Medical Association, then organizations of insurance companies and employer groups, have been able to defeat every effort to enact national health insurance across an entire century because they had superior resources and an organizational structure that closely mirrored the federated arrangements of the American state. The exception occurred when the AFL-CIO, with its national leadership, state federations and union locals, mobilized on behalf of Medicare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews various theoretical perspectives on organizational change which have been and could be applied to medical organizations. These perspectives are discussed as both filters influencing our observations (research) and mirrors of the shifting dynamics of delivery system reform (policy). We conclude with an examination of how such theories can provide useful insights into our rapidly changing health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A central sociological premise is that health care systems are organizations that are embedded within larger institutions, which have been shaped by historical precedents and operate within a specific cultural context. Although bound by policy legacies, embedded constituencies, and path dependent processes, health care systems are not rigid, static, and impervious to change. The success of health care reform in 2010 has shown that existing regimes do have the capacity to respond to new needs in ways that transcend their institutional and ideological limits. For the United States the question is how health care reform will reconfigure the existing network of public and private benefits and the power relationships between the numerous constituencies surrounding them. This article considers how institutions, interest groups, and ideology have affected the organization of the health care system in the United States as well as in other nations. It then discusses issues for future research in the aftermath of the 2009-10 health care reform debate. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this article we analyze the corporate dominance of health care in the United States and the dynamics that have motivated the international expansion of multinational health care corporations, especially to Latin America. We identify the strategies, actions, and effects of multinational corporations in health care delivery and public health policies. Our methods have included systematic bibliographical research and in-depth interviews in the United States, Mexico, and Brazil. Influenced by public policy makers in the United States, such organizations as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and World Trade Organization have advocated policies that encourage reduction and privatization of health care and public health services previously provided in the public sector. Multinational managed care organizations have entered managed care markets in several Latin American count fries at the same time as they were withdrawing from managed care activities in Medicaid and Medicare within the United States. Corporate strategies have culminated in a marked expansion of corporations' access to social security and related public sector funds for the support of privatized health services. International financial institutions and multinational corporations have influenced reforms that, while favorable to corporate interests, have worsened access to needed services and have strained the remaining public sector institutions. A theoretical approach to these problems emphasizes the falling rate of profit as an economic motivation of corporate actions, silent reform, and the subordination of polity to economy. Praxis to address these problems involves opposition to policies that enhance corporate interests while reducing public sector services, as well as alternative models that emphasize a strengthened public sector [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the lack of confidence in government agencies to operate a nationalized health-care system in the United States, government agencies have significantly influenced the distribution and financing of health-care services in the market. Using the State of Florida as a case study, we examine the conditions under which a state health-care agency can consistently influence health-care market arrangements. We examined records from Florida's legislative sessions between 1965 and 1993 focusing on 27 legislative initiatives to involve the state's healthcare agencies in the health-care services market. Using Boolean qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), we examined the conditions that facilitated or inhibited legislative policy initiatives for state action in Florida's health-care services market. The cohesiveness of state administrative agency and legislative leadership is of primary importance. Fragmented interests among health-care providers and fiscally legitimate policy positions, whether those of state agencies or health-care providers, are important enabling factors for state action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For some time, sociologists have debated whether physicians still retain dominance in the health care world, public faith in their moral and scientific authority, and the autonomy to set work conditions and make clinical decisions. Using ideas derived from this debate, we analyze the impact of changes in the health care environment on physician satisfaction. Our data come from a mailed survey of 510 Arizona physicians. Our results show that background physician attributes did not predict satisfaction, nor did most organizational attributes. However, participation in IPAs (Individual Practice Associations) predicted higher satisfaction, while payment according to a third party payer's fee-for-service schedule predicted lower satisfaction. In addition, physicians were more likely to be satisfied if they wrote the orders that non-physicians had to follow, were paid what they wanted, did not need to subordinate their clinical judgment to that of non-physicians, and believed that their patients had confidence in physicians. Our conclusions discuss both theoretical and policy implications of our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The organization and delivery of health care in the United States is undergoing significant social, organizational, economic, political, and cultural changes with important implications for the future of medicine as a profession. This essay will draw upon some of these changes and briefly review major sociological writings on the nature of medicine's professional status to examine the nature of professional dynamics in a changing environment. To this end, we focus on the nature of medical work and how this work impacts on and is impacted by medicine's own internal differentiation and the presence of contested domains at medicine's periphery. We trace this dynamic through a number of issues including the multidimensional nature of medical work, the role of elites in that work, and how changes in the terms and conditions of work can exert changes at medicine's technical core. We close with some thoughts on the relationship of public policy to medicine's professional status, the role health policy might take in shaping a new professional status, the role health policy might take in shaping a new professional ethnic for medicine, and the role sociologists might play in this process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an analysis of short-term medical and surgical hospitals in a nationwide sample of communities, we found a clear relation between physician characteristics and both variety and duplication of hospital-based health care services. Diversity of physician specialties was directly related to variety of hospital services in a community and altered the relation between hospital services and population characteristics such as education and age diversity. The ratio of physicians to the population was a strong predictor of the duplication of hospital-based services. While both financial and patient care personnel resources were also directly related to differentiation of services, per capita community income was not. Results emphasize the important role played by boundary-spanning agents, such as physicians, who channel resources and demands to organizations. Findings also indicate that health care policy designed to encourage an equitable distribution of facilities and providers should focus on the relation between hospital and physician. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A pressing concern in contemporary health policy is whether the medical profession’s mandate to take care of clients has been undermined by the influx of money into health care. We examine the medical profession’s transformation over the past decades. First, we review how sociologists have viewed the medical profession over the past half-century as one stakeholder among other stakeholders vying for market share and power in the health care field.We then examine three recent challenges to the profession that exemplify the tension between self-interest and collective altruism to act in the best interest of patients: (1) the rise of patient consumerism, (2) the advent of evidence-based medicine, and (3) the increasing power of the pharmaceutical industry. We show the resilience of the medical profession as it adapts and transforms in response to these challenges. We conclude with implications to help inform policy makers’ assessments of how the medical profession will react to policy initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]