Effect of capitation payment method on health outcomes, healthcare utilization, and referrals in Ghana.

PLOS global public health Pub Date : 2024-06-21 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pgph.0002423
Micheal Kofi Boachie, Eugenia Amporfu
{"title":"Effect of capitation payment method on health outcomes, healthcare utilization, and referrals in Ghana.","authors":"Micheal Kofi Boachie, Eugenia Amporfu","doi":"10.1371/journal.pgph.0002423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Different provider payment systems generate different incentives for patients, providers, and purchasers. Ghana introduced the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in 2003 and has made reforms to its provider payment methods to create incentives in providers for cost containment. Starting with the fee for service method, it shifted to the Diagnostic Related Group (DRG) method in 2008 to improve cost containment. In 2012 the NHIS began piloting capitation method of payment which has been suspended since 2017 to allow for thorough review. This study uncovers the association between capitation payment system and patient health outcomes, utilization of healthcare services and referral patterns in Ghana based on data collected between November 2012 and January 2013. Using a cross-sectional data on 500 malaria patients who were enrollees of the NHIS from the two payment plans (i.e., capitation and DRG plan), ordered logit, negative binomial and logit regression results showed that patients under capitation were 11.9% less likely to report better health and had 1.583 fewer visits relative to patients under DRG. In relation to referrals, capitated providers were more likely to refer patients than under DRG plans. In the capitated region, better health outcomes were reported by patients of private health facilities. Capitation in Ghana was associated with under-provision of care, hence decreasing any efficiency gain from the reform. Implementors of capitation need to ensure a good monitoring and evaluation system for adequate provision of quantity and quality of care. Some limitations of this study include the use of cross sectional rather that panel data which follows individuals over time and therefore may be more able to provide definite information about cause-and-effect relationships. It also does not account for events before and after the introduction of any payment method. Overall, this study provides valuable information on the implementation policy for reintroducing capitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":74466,"journal":{"name":"PLOS global public health","volume":"4 6","pages":"e0002423"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11192346/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS global public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002423","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Different provider payment systems generate different incentives for patients, providers, and purchasers. Ghana introduced the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in 2003 and has made reforms to its provider payment methods to create incentives in providers for cost containment. Starting with the fee for service method, it shifted to the Diagnostic Related Group (DRG) method in 2008 to improve cost containment. In 2012 the NHIS began piloting capitation method of payment which has been suspended since 2017 to allow for thorough review. This study uncovers the association between capitation payment system and patient health outcomes, utilization of healthcare services and referral patterns in Ghana based on data collected between November 2012 and January 2013. Using a cross-sectional data on 500 malaria patients who were enrollees of the NHIS from the two payment plans (i.e., capitation and DRG plan), ordered logit, negative binomial and logit regression results showed that patients under capitation were 11.9% less likely to report better health and had 1.583 fewer visits relative to patients under DRG. In relation to referrals, capitated providers were more likely to refer patients than under DRG plans. In the capitated region, better health outcomes were reported by patients of private health facilities. Capitation in Ghana was associated with under-provision of care, hence decreasing any efficiency gain from the reform. Implementors of capitation need to ensure a good monitoring and evaluation system for adequate provision of quantity and quality of care. Some limitations of this study include the use of cross sectional rather that panel data which follows individuals over time and therefore may be more able to provide definite information about cause-and-effect relationships. It also does not account for events before and after the introduction of any payment method. Overall, this study provides valuable information on the implementation policy for reintroducing capitation.

按人头付费方法对加纳医疗成果、医疗利用率和转诊率的影响。
不同的医疗服务提供者支付系统对患者、医疗服务提供者和购买者产生不同的激励作用。加纳于 2003 年推出了国家医疗保险计划 (NHIS),并对其医疗服务支付方法进行了改革,以激励医疗服务提供者控制成本。从服务收费法开始,加纳于 2008 年改用诊断相关组(DRG)法,以加强成本控制。2012 年,NHIS 开始试行按人头付费法,自 2017 年起暂停,以便进行彻底审查。本研究基于 2012 年 11 月至 2013 年 1 月期间收集的数据,揭示了按人头付费系统与加纳患者健康结果、医疗服务利用率和转诊模式之间的关联。通过对两种付费计划(即按人头付费计划和 DRG 计划)的 500 名国家医疗保险计划(NHIS)参保疟疾患者的横截面数据进行有序对数、负二项式和对数回归,结果显示,与 DRG 计划的患者相比,按人头付费计划的患者报告健康状况更好的可能性要低 11.9%,就诊次数要少 1.583 次。在转诊方面,与 DRG 计划相比,按人头付费的医疗服务提供者更有可能转诊病人。在按人头付费地区,私立医疗机构的患者报告的健康状况更好。加纳的按人头付费与医疗服务提供不足有关,因此降低了改革带来的效率收益。按人头付费的实施者需要确保有一个良好的监测和评估系统,以充分保证医疗服务的数量和质量。本研究的一些局限性包括:使用的是横截面数据而非面板数据,面板数据会随着时间的推移对个人进行跟踪,因此可能更能提供有关因果关系的明确信息。此外,本研究也没有考虑引入任何付费方法前后发生的事件。总之,这项研究为重新引入按人头付费的实施政策提供了宝贵的信息。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信