Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:51:27.980Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diffusion of New Technologies in the Treatment of the Medicare Population: Implications for Patient Access and Program Expenditures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Robert C. Boutwell  and
Janet B. Mitchell
Robert C. Boutwell
Affiliation:
Health Economics ResearchInc.
Janet B. Mitchell
Affiliation:
Health Economics ResearchInc.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Patterns of diffusion were analyzed for three pairs of technologies: one of each pair represents a very recent innovation, and the other is more established. Tremendous growth in utilization from 1985–89 was documented, primarily due to more patients obtaining access to the technologies. Nevertheless, disturbing differences in levels of use remain between black and white patients.

Type
General Essays
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , Winter 1993 , pp. 62 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Ayanian, E., & Epstein, A. M.Differences in the use of procedures between women and men hospitalized for coronary heart disease. New England ournal of Medicine, 1991, 325, 221–25.Google Scholar
2.Ford, E., Cooper, R., Castaner, A., et al. Coronary arteriography and coronary bypass surgery among whites and other racial groups relative to hospital-based incidence rates for coronary artery disease: Findings from NHDS. American ournal of Public Health, 1989, 79, 437–40.Google Scholar
3.Garfinkel, S. A., Bonito, A., & McLeroy, K. R.Socioeconomic factors and medical supplemental health insurance. Health Care Financing Review, 1989, 9, 21–30.Google Scholar
4.Kittner, S. J., White, L. R., Losonczy, K. G., et al. Black-white differences in stone incidence in a national sample. ournal of the American Medical Association, 1990, 264,1267–70.Google Scholar
5.Long, S. H., Settle, R. F., & Link, C. R.Who bears the burden of Medicare cost sharing? Inquiry, 1982, 19, 222–34.Google Scholar
6.Maynard, C., Fisher, L. D., Passamani, E. R., et al. Blacks in the coronary artery surgery study (CASS): Race and clinical decision making. American ournal of Public Health, 1986, 76, 1446–48.Google Scholar
7.Mitchell, . B., Wedig, G., & Cromwell, . The Medicare physician fee freeze: What really happened? Health Affairs, 1989, Spring, 21–33.Google Scholar
8.Mulley, A. G.Management of nephrolithiasis: New approaches to “surgical” kidney stones. Annual Review of Medicine, 1988, 39, 347–55.Google Scholar
9.Schuster, ., & Schaeffer, R. L.Economic impact of kidney stones in white male adults. Urology, 1984, 24, 327–31.Google Scholar
10.Steingart, R. M.Sex differences in the management of coronary artery disease. New England ournal of Medicine, 1989, 261, 253–57.Google Scholar
11.Wenneker, M. B., & Epstein, A. M.Racial inequalities in the use of procedures for patients with ischemic heart disease in Massachusetts. ournal of the American Medical Association, 1989, 261, 253–57.Google Scholar
12.Wenneker, M. B., Weissman, . S., & Epstein, A. M.The association of payer with utilization of cardiac procedures in Massachusetts. ournal of the American Medical Association, 1990, 264, 1255–66.Google Scholar