Economic evaluation of inpatient medication reconciliation with a subtraction strategy.

IF 3.3 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Nontakorn Khomsanoi, Theetad Chombandit, Jurinporn Wiwatmanaskul, Chatchai Kreepala
{"title":"Economic evaluation of inpatient medication reconciliation with a subtraction strategy.","authors":"Nontakorn Khomsanoi, Theetad Chombandit, Jurinporn Wiwatmanaskul, Chatchai Kreepala","doi":"10.1186/s13561-025-00649-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>University-based hospitals in Thailand face increasing financial strain due to insufficient reimbursement for inpatient care. The public health financing system comprises three major schemes: the Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS), Social Security Scheme (SSS), and Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme (CSMBS), which differ in funding mechanisms and reimbursement rates. Although all schemes apply the Diagnosis-Related Groups (DRG) system for inpatient payment, variations in base rates and case-mix complexity often leave tertiary hospitals underfunded. Medication reconciliation (MR) with a subtraction strategy-deducting patients' home medications from discharge prescriptions-has been implemented to optimize hospital resources. This study aimed to evaluate cost savings and identify key determinants influencing the economic outcomes of MR across public insurance schemes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 563 hospitalized internal medicine patients at a university-based hospital. Of these, 324 underwent MR with subtraction. Cost savings and reimbursement margins were calculated from the provider's perspective. Patients were stratified by healthcare scheme (CSMBS, UCS, SSS) and length of stay (LOS). Generalized Linear Mixed Models were used to identify factors associated with cost savings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The highest mean cost savings per patient were observed in the SSS group (508.5 ± 56.1 THB [~ 14.1 USD]), and the lowest in CSMBS (133.5 ± 23.6 THB [~ 3.7 USD]). Prolonged LOS was associated with significantly greater savings (LOS > 21 days: IRR = 2.45, p < 0.001). SSS patients achieved the greatest overall savings (IRR = 3.95, p < 0.001). Nonetheless, negative reimbursement margins persisted across all schemes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although MR with subtraction achieved measurable cost savings, it failed to offset reimbursement deficits. Broader financial reforms are needed to ensure sustainability, with MR positioned as a potentially scalable strategy within value-based care frameworks.</p>","PeriodicalId":46936,"journal":{"name":"Health Economics Review","volume":"15 1","pages":"52"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12181825/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-025-00649-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: University-based hospitals in Thailand face increasing financial strain due to insufficient reimbursement for inpatient care. The public health financing system comprises three major schemes: the Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS), Social Security Scheme (SSS), and Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme (CSMBS), which differ in funding mechanisms and reimbursement rates. Although all schemes apply the Diagnosis-Related Groups (DRG) system for inpatient payment, variations in base rates and case-mix complexity often leave tertiary hospitals underfunded. Medication reconciliation (MR) with a subtraction strategy-deducting patients' home medications from discharge prescriptions-has been implemented to optimize hospital resources. This study aimed to evaluate cost savings and identify key determinants influencing the economic outcomes of MR across public insurance schemes.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 563 hospitalized internal medicine patients at a university-based hospital. Of these, 324 underwent MR with subtraction. Cost savings and reimbursement margins were calculated from the provider's perspective. Patients were stratified by healthcare scheme (CSMBS, UCS, SSS) and length of stay (LOS). Generalized Linear Mixed Models were used to identify factors associated with cost savings.

Results: The highest mean cost savings per patient were observed in the SSS group (508.5 ± 56.1 THB [~ 14.1 USD]), and the lowest in CSMBS (133.5 ± 23.6 THB [~ 3.7 USD]). Prolonged LOS was associated with significantly greater savings (LOS > 21 days: IRR = 2.45, p < 0.001). SSS patients achieved the greatest overall savings (IRR = 3.95, p < 0.001). Nonetheless, negative reimbursement margins persisted across all schemes.

Conclusions: Although MR with subtraction achieved measurable cost savings, it failed to offset reimbursement deficits. Broader financial reforms are needed to ensure sustainability, with MR positioned as a potentially scalable strategy within value-based care frameworks.

Abstract Image

采用减法策略对住院患者用药和解的经济评价。
背景:泰国的大学医院由于住院治疗费用报销不足而面临越来越大的财政压力。公共卫生筹资系统包括三个主要计划:全民覆盖计划、社会保障计划和公务员医疗福利计划,它们的筹资机制和报销率各不相同。尽管所有计划都采用与诊断相关的分组(DRG)系统支付住院病人的费用,但基本费率的变化和病例组合的复杂性往往使三级医院资金不足。采用减法策略(从出院处方中扣除患者的家庭药物)的药物调节(MR)已被实施以优化医院资源。本研究旨在评估成本节约,并确定影响公共保险计划中MR经济结果的关键决定因素。方法:对某大学附属医院563例住院内科患者进行回顾性队列研究。其中,324人接受了核磁共振减法治疗。从提供者的角度计算成本节约和报销差额。根据医疗方案(CSMBS、UCS、SSS)和住院时间(LOS)对患者进行分层。使用广义线性混合模型来确定与成本节约相关的因素。结果:SSS组每位患者平均节省的费用最高(508.5±56.1 THB[~ 14.1美元]),CSMBS组最低(133.5±23.6 THB[~ 3.7美元])。延长的LOS与更大的节省相关(LOS bbb21天:IRR = 2.45, p)。结论:尽管减法MR实现了可测量的成本节约,但未能抵消报销赤字。需要进行更广泛的金融改革以确保可持续性,将MR定位为基于价值的护理框架内具有可扩展潜力的战略。
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
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.20%
发文量
59
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Economics Review is an international high-quality journal covering all fields of Health Economics. A broad range of theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy with a health economic focus will be considered for publication. Its scope includes macro- and microeconomics of health care financing, health insurance and reimbursement as well as health economic evaluation, health services research and health policy analysis. Further research topics are the individual and institutional aspects of health care management and the growing importance of health care in developing countries.
×
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