In healthcare, the Iron Triangle refers to the concept that accessibility, affordability, and quality cannot all be addressed simultaneously. The Iron Triangle Healthcare is affiliated with mental health and military sexual trauma therapy group. According to the study, there is a great deal of variance in mental health and drug abuse treatment between and within different sexual assault care models (Lehtonen 290). There was no accurate information on how sexual assault services can assist service users with mental health and drug addiction difficulties. This paper will discuss a peer-reviewed journal article on Iron Triangle Healthcare in a place where I am currently completing my internship.
A peer-reviewed academic article in Healthcare Management backs up the work. In politics, the “Iron Triangle” denotes a closed and lucrative arrangement with three government agencies that support fewer elected officials than the broader population (Lehtonen 293). In the iron triangle of healthcare, Triple Am aims to improve the performance of healthcare systems in terms of cost, quality, and accessibility. When one side of the triangle improves, the other deteriorates. As prices fall, so does quality, and the capacity to see more patients suffers. As access expands, expenses rise and quality decreases over time. Managers might restrict access or choose patients with greater coverage to fulfill health organization goals. The cost, well-being, and availability of large-scale research, all of which provide varied outcomes, are all determined by the method and arrangement of each study in the Triangle Iron of health care.
The fundamental issue is that most research only looks at two of the factors. Various public estimates on price, welfare, and access are available. The issue with government policy is that it attempts to accomplish too much rather than focusing on one thing. Because there is no such thing as absolute worth, one side wants to discuss pricing, while the other wants to discuss access, and so on (Lehtonen 279). Officials at the hospital believe that the processing and payment procedure is continually shifting as a result of inconsistencies in the guidelines. Until progress is made, legislators should concentrate on one part of the Iron Triangle. The worldwide opportunity is the first indicator that policymakers should pay attention to. Cost-cutting and quality-improvement efforts will always come at the expense of others until health care is available to all Americans.
Lehtonen, Markku. “Evaluating megaprojects: From the ‘iron triangle to network mapping.” Evaluation 20.3 (2014): 278-295.