title: Is the IDS glass half empty or half full?
abstract: When the concept of integrated delivery began gaining popularity throughout the healthare field, some healthcare executies saw it as the solution for organizations struggling to contain rapidly rising costs. Others hoped that joining integrated delivery systems would help preserve smaller organizations that could not otherwise compete with larger providers in the same area. And many in healthcare thought that it had the potential to dramatically enhance quality of care and promote wellness. As integration becomes increasingly common, the practice is coming under heavy criticism from those who say it has not lived up to expectatations. At the same time, however, systems that are seeing success with integrated delivery are singing its praises. "The jury is still out on the effectiveness of integrated delivery systems," says Austin Ross, FACHE, a professor at the University of Washington's School of Public Health, Seattle. "So far, they have a spotty record. There have been some serious failures, but some positive things are taking place, too." Some experts say that integrated delivery systems are doomed; others believe there are good reasons to be optimistic. So is the glass half empty or half full?
authors.forename: J T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Nilson
mesh_terms: D000554:Ambulatory Care Facilities / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D001509:Bed Occupancy / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D019985:Benchmarking; D019033:Delivery of Health Care, Integrated / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017598:Efficiency, Organizational; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D007902:Length of Stay / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017146:Models, Organizational; D009935:Organizational Affiliation; D009937:Organizational Objectives; D010343:Patient Admission / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011787:Quality of Health Care; D014481:United States