296 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10265221)
1. How can PPOs control prices without violating antitrust laws?
Fried JM
Hosp Prog; 1984 Mar; 65(3):34-7. PubMed ID: 10265221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The development of preferred provider organizations and its antitrust implications.
Maram BS
J Med Pract Manage; 1985 Oct; 1(2):130-5. PubMed ID: 10281825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Antitrust and third party insurers.
Heitler G
Am J Law Med; 1982; 8(3):251-70. PubMed ID: 7168451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluating antitrust risk in joint provider negotiations with payors.
Leonard EJ
Med Staff Couns; 1992; 6(1):41-7. PubMed ID: 10115450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Physicians and PPOs: antitrust lessons from Maricopa.
Finke RF; Gary M
Hosp Med Staff; 1983 Jul; 12(7):10-5. PubMed ID: 10278175
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Minimizing antitrust and corporate liability risks.
Weissburg C
Health Prog; 1987 Apr; 68(3):68-73, 90. PubMed ID: 10282282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An economic analysis of the Maricopa decision.
Goldberg LG; Greenberg W
Health Matrix; 1987; 5(2):26-30. PubMed ID: 10283416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Can provider antitrust suits against payers be successful?
Enders RJ
Healthc Financ Manage; 1986 Jun; 40(6):72-80. PubMed ID: 10276682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Monopolies, Maricopa, and marketing: a case study.
Perkins J; Mercer A; McClary C
Hosp Health Serv Adm; 1986; 31(4):34-44. PubMed ID: 10277339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Preferred provider organizations. Implications of the fastest growing health care option.
Ermann D
Consultant; 1987 Apr; 27(4):102-5. PubMed ID: 10290000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Physicians and PPOs: antitrust considerations in setting fees.
Fried JM; Romansky MA
Internist; 1984 Apr; 25(4):18, 32. PubMed ID: 10266538
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Are PPOs a competitive force or antitrust risk?
Enders RJ
Healthc Financ Manage; 1986 May; 40(5):52-60. PubMed ID: 10276171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Antitrust implications of joint negotiations with third party payers.
Rainer JM
Top Health Care Financ; 1986; 13(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 3810649
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Preferred provider organizations and antitrust policy: some recent issues.
Costillo LB
Health Matrix; 1986; 4(2):22-5. PubMed ID: 10278618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Recent supreme court antitrust rulings in health care.
Podell LB
Am J Hosp Pharm; 1983 Apr; 40(4):639-41. PubMed ID: 6846375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Antitrust and health care: provider controlled health plans and the Maricopa decision.
Weller CD
Am J Law Med; 1982; 8(3):223-49. PubMed ID: 6897759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Physician unionization.
Lebowitz PH
Radiol Manage; 1997; 19(6):42-5. PubMed ID: 10175326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Government agencies soften stance on what constitutes price fixing.
Ettinger DA; Lasser ML
Healthc Financ Manage; 1997 Feb; 51(2):27-9. PubMed ID: 10164872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. PPOs and the antitrust laws.
Stromberg RE; Duncheon MA; Goldman JS
Hospitals; 1983 Oct; 57(20):65-70. PubMed ID: 6618473
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Arizona v. Maricopa County: a stern antitrust warning to healthcare providers.
Halper HR
Healthc Financ Manage; 1982 Oct; 36(10):38-42. PubMed ID: 10315212
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
