This article examines the role of collective physician participation in the third-party reimbursement system. It critiques the Havighurst-Kissam analysis of the antitrust implications of professionally-developed relative value guides and using lessons derived from the only litigated case on relative value guides, argues that collective physician input into third-party reimbursement plans can be made in a manner which is consistent with the antitrust laws and cost-containment policy objectives. In particular, collective “negotiations” by organized physicians with third parties, unaccompanied by fee agreements among physicians or by actual or threatened physician boycotts, are found to be procompetitive and hence permissible under the rule of reason.
Skip Nav Destination
Research Article| February 01 1982
Antitrust Law and Collective Physician Negotiations with Third Parties: The Relative Value Guide Object Lesson
Rickard F. Pfizenmayer
J Health Polit Policy Law (1982) 7 (1): 128–162.
Rickard F. Pfizenmayer; Antitrust Law and Collective Physician Negotiations with Third Parties: The Relative Value Guide Object Lesson. J Health Polit Policy Law 1 February 1982; 7 (1): 128–162. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-7-1-128
Download citation file:
Don't already have an account? Register
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Could not validate captcha. Please try again.
Sign in via your InstitutionSign In
Citing articles via
Redressing the Imbalanced Political Market for Health Policy: A Role for the State Attorney General?