The article under consideration dwells upon integrated delivery systems. The author states that these organizations are often regarded as a more efficient alternative to the existing care delivery systems (Frakt par. 6). The author notes that proponents of the approach emphasize that integrated delivery systems are more cost-efficient as the can save money due to integration and provide high-quality services due to proper coordination. Nonetheless, the author also emphasizes that the recent research shows that integrated the delivery system is not cost-effective as the prices turn out to be higher while the quality of services similar to the one provided in more conventional health care organizations.
The article in question is a valuable source as it provides important insights into the peculiarities of integrated delivery systems. Frakt notes that the integrated delivery system is a health care organization that includes several units, employs different physicians and can even have a nursing home or other facilities (par. 6). The author also mentions that these organizations are thought to be a way to reduce hospitals’ costs and prices for health care services. At the same time, it is clear that these systems are associated with high prices and similar quality.
The article has manifold implications for practitioners as well as policy makers. First, it contributes to the ongoing debate on the matter. It is vital to share ideas and make people involved in the discussion as they will potentially use the systems. Furthermore, the author unveils existing drawbacks of the new approach. Importantly, the researcher notes that officials tend to be rather excessively optimistic as to integrated delivery systems. They encourage health care organizations to adopt the new approach and become integrated entities. Nonetheless, the efficiency of the systems is almost intangible. One of the major pitfalls is employing physicians as it is associated with higher costs.
The article can become a starting point in the transformation of the integrated delivery system into an effective tool for the delivery of high-quality health care services. It is essential to focus on such issues as the employment of physicians and coordination. The effort should be invested in these areas as they make integrated delivery systems rather ineffective. The idea of the provision of integrated health care services is very good, and it can change the entire health care system for better. Patients will not have to try to monitor the health care services provided as this is often quite a complicated task. Patients do not have the necessary skills to do that, and it makes the efficiency of the existing health care system rather questionable. Therefore, it is important to make the systems work.
It is possible to note that the article in question provides important insights into the benefits and downsides of integrated delivery systems. It is clear that the system is less efficient as it is widely accepted, but it is still obvious that this approach can and should work efficiently. The discussion of the major issues can result in the development of effective methods to overcome the difficulties. Of course, patients will be the ones to benefit from the creation of a truly integrated delivery system that will be cost-effective. The government will also be able to save significant funds. One of the most significant merits of this article is its ability to draw people’s attention to the problem.
Works Cited
Frakt, Austin. “The Downside of Merging Doctors and Hospitals.” The New York Times, 2016. Web.