Readmission and Hospital Quality Under Prospective Payment System

C. Guccio, D. Lisi, G. Pignataro
{"title":"Readmission and Hospital Quality Under Prospective Payment System","authors":"C. Guccio, D. Lisi, G. Pignataro","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2350689","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Nowadays different healthcare policies in OECD countries seem to consider hospital readmissions somehow “quality dependent”. Nonetheless, the theoretical literature on the incentives provided by payment systems tend to disregard this aspect, which indeed might be relevant in driving providers’ behaviour. In this paper we study the incentives for hospitals to provide quality and cost-reducing effort under different payment regimes, either a global budgeting or a prospective payment system, considering explicitly the role played by financial incentives directly linked to readmissions. As far as the specific results about quality are concerned, we find that prospective payment systems do not necessarily perform better than retrospective systems if the reimbursement to hospitals is not adjusted to take into account specific outcome-based indicators of quality, such as readmissions. More specifically, if patients readmitted are fully paid to hospitals, moving from a retrospective to a prospective payment systems might even induce a reduction on quality and, in turn, an increase in readmission probability. However, if the prospective payment system is adjusted for internalizing this counter-incentive, by a different payment for patients readmitted, it could be able to foster a higher treatment quality through the competition channel.","PeriodicalId":403132,"journal":{"name":"HEN: Financing & Budgeting (Topic)","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HEN: Financing & Budgeting (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2350689","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Nowadays different healthcare policies in OECD countries seem to consider hospital readmissions somehow “quality dependent”. Nonetheless, the theoretical literature on the incentives provided by payment systems tend to disregard this aspect, which indeed might be relevant in driving providers’ behaviour. In this paper we study the incentives for hospitals to provide quality and cost-reducing effort under different payment regimes, either a global budgeting or a prospective payment system, considering explicitly the role played by financial incentives directly linked to readmissions. As far as the specific results about quality are concerned, we find that prospective payment systems do not necessarily perform better than retrospective systems if the reimbursement to hospitals is not adjusted to take into account specific outcome-based indicators of quality, such as readmissions. More specifically, if patients readmitted are fully paid to hospitals, moving from a retrospective to a prospective payment systems might even induce a reduction on quality and, in turn, an increase in readmission probability. However, if the prospective payment system is adjusted for internalizing this counter-incentive, by a different payment for patients readmitted, it could be able to foster a higher treatment quality through the competition channel.
前瞻性支付制度下的再入院率和医院质量
如今,经合组织国家的不同医疗保健政策似乎认为医院再入院在某种程度上“依赖于质量”。尽管如此,关于支付系统提供的激励的理论文献往往忽略了这一方面,这确实可能与驱动提供者的行为有关。在本文中,我们研究了医院在不同的支付制度下提供质量和降低成本的激励措施,无论是全球预算还是前瞻性支付制度,明确考虑与再入院直接相关的财务激励所起的作用。就质量的具体结果而言,我们发现,如果对医院的报销没有进行调整,以考虑到具体的基于结果的质量指标,如再入院率,前瞻性支付系统不一定比回顾性系统表现得更好。更具体地说,如果再入院的患者全额支付给医院,从回顾性支付系统转向前瞻性支付系统甚至可能导致质量下降,进而增加再入院的可能性。然而,如果对未来的支付系统进行调整,使这种反激励内部化,通过对重新入院的患者进行不同的支付,它可以通过竞争渠道促进更高的治疗质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信