日本经皮冠状动脉介入治疗技术费用的适宜性

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Satoru Hashimoto , Yoshihiro Motozawa , Burt Cohen , Toshiki Mano
{"title":"日本经皮冠状动脉介入治疗技术费用的适宜性","authors":"Satoru Hashimoto ,&nbsp;Yoshihiro Motozawa ,&nbsp;Burt Cohen ,&nbsp;Toshiki Mano","doi":"10.1016/j.hlpt.2025.101026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>In Japan, reimbursements of technical fees for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not considered to reflect actual medical costs, since medical procedures frequently cost hospitals more than they make. This study evaluated the appropriateness of PCI technical fees in Japan as part of reimbursed medical fees.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We estimated the PCI technical fee’s validity from three approaches including 1) costing calculation, 2) survey-based cost estimation, and 3) lost profit methods.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>For the costing calculation method, we used the draft proposal that is evaluated by the Japanese Health Insurance Federation for Surgery (Gaihoren draft proposal). The proposal indicated PCI technical fees of ¥727,997 for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and ¥596,397 for unstable angina (UA). For the survey-based cost estimation method, a survey of cardiologists showed the appropriateness of ¥814,600 and ¥554,825 for AMI-PCI and UA-PCI, respectively, while the lost profit method evaluated AMI-PCI at ¥812,210 and UA-PCI at ¥773,961. The average costs of technical fees calculated according to the three approaches were ¥772,186 for AMI-PCI and ¥566,688 for UA-PCI, which are higher than the existing reimbursements of ¥343,800 and ¥243,800, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The present study showed that technical fees for PCI did not reflect estimated costs in three approaches. The majority of hospitals in Japan are operating at a loss for medical profit, and these results call into question, the need for a review of the healthcare costs reimbursed by the government.</div></div><div><h3>Lay summary</h3><div>In Japan, reimbursement prices of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) technical fees are considered to be lower than the actual cost, which can translate to losses for hospitals, especially when complex PCI procedures are performed. We estimated the appropriateness of technical fees using three approaches including 1) costing calculation, 2) survey-based cost estimation, and 3) lost profit methods. The results confirmed that technical fees, which form the core of medical fees, do not reflect estimated costs. It was suggested that this discrepancy has led to a deficit in the structure of Japanese hospitals.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48672,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy and Technology","volume":"14 3","pages":"Article 101026"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Appropriateness of the percutaneous coronary intervention technical fee in Japan\",\"authors\":\"Satoru Hashimoto ,&nbsp;Yoshihiro Motozawa ,&nbsp;Burt Cohen ,&nbsp;Toshiki Mano\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hlpt.2025.101026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>In Japan, reimbursements of technical fees for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not considered to reflect actual medical costs, since medical procedures frequently cost hospitals more than they make. This study evaluated the appropriateness of PCI technical fees in Japan as part of reimbursed medical fees.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We estimated the PCI technical fee’s validity from three approaches including 1) costing calculation, 2) survey-based cost estimation, and 3) lost profit methods.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>For the costing calculation method, we used the draft proposal that is evaluated by the Japanese Health Insurance Federation for Surgery (Gaihoren draft proposal). The proposal indicated PCI technical fees of ¥727,997 for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and ¥596,397 for unstable angina (UA). For the survey-based cost estimation method, a survey of cardiologists showed the appropriateness of ¥814,600 and ¥554,825 for AMI-PCI and UA-PCI, respectively, while the lost profit method evaluated AMI-PCI at ¥812,210 and UA-PCI at ¥773,961. The average costs of technical fees calculated according to the three approaches were ¥772,186 for AMI-PCI and ¥566,688 for UA-PCI, which are higher than the existing reimbursements of ¥343,800 and ¥243,800, respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The present study showed that technical fees for PCI did not reflect estimated costs in three approaches. The majority of hospitals in Japan are operating at a loss for medical profit, and these results call into question, the need for a review of the healthcare costs reimbursed by the government.</div></div><div><h3>Lay summary</h3><div>In Japan, reimbursement prices of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) technical fees are considered to be lower than the actual cost, which can translate to losses for hospitals, especially when complex PCI procedures are performed. We estimated the appropriateness of technical fees using three approaches including 1) costing calculation, 2) survey-based cost estimation, and 3) lost profit methods. The results confirmed that technical fees, which form the core of medical fees, do not reflect estimated costs. It was suggested that this discrepancy has led to a deficit in the structure of Japanese hospitals.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Policy and Technology\",\"volume\":\"14 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 101026\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Policy and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883725000541\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883725000541","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的在日本,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的技术费用报销不被认为反映了实际的医疗成本,因为医疗程序的成本经常高于医院的收入。本研究评估了日本将PCI技术费用作为报销医疗费用的一部分的适宜性。方法采用成本计算法、基于调查的成本估算法和亏损利润法对PCI技术费用的有效性进行评估。结果成本计算方法采用日本外科健康保险联合会评估的提案草案(Gaihoren草案)。建议急性心肌梗死(AMI) PCI技术费用为727997元,不稳定型心绞痛(UA) PCI技术费用为596397元。对于基于调查的成本估算法,对心脏病专家的调查显示AMI-PCI和UA-PCI的适宜性分别为814,600元和554,825元,而亏损利润法对AMI-PCI和UA-PCI的适宜性分别为812,210元和773,961元。三种方法计算的技术费用平均成本分别为AMI-PCI 772,186元、UA-PCI 566,688元,高于现有的报销金额343,800元、243,800元。结论本研究显示PCI的技术费用不能反映三种方法的估计成本。日本的大多数医院在医疗利润方面都处于亏损状态,这些结果令人质疑,是否有必要对政府报销的医疗费用进行审查。在日本,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)技术费用的报销价格被认为低于实际成本,这可能转化为医院的损失,特别是在进行复杂的PCI手术时。我们使用三种方法来评估技术费用的适当性,包括1)成本计算,2)基于调查的成本估算和3)损失利润法。结果证实,构成医疗费用核心的技术费用没有反映估计费用。有人认为,这种差异导致了日本医院结构的赤字。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Appropriateness of the percutaneous coronary intervention technical fee in Japan

Objectives

In Japan, reimbursements of technical fees for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not considered to reflect actual medical costs, since medical procedures frequently cost hospitals more than they make. This study evaluated the appropriateness of PCI technical fees in Japan as part of reimbursed medical fees.

Methods

We estimated the PCI technical fee’s validity from three approaches including 1) costing calculation, 2) survey-based cost estimation, and 3) lost profit methods.

Results

For the costing calculation method, we used the draft proposal that is evaluated by the Japanese Health Insurance Federation for Surgery (Gaihoren draft proposal). The proposal indicated PCI technical fees of ¥727,997 for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and ¥596,397 for unstable angina (UA). For the survey-based cost estimation method, a survey of cardiologists showed the appropriateness of ¥814,600 and ¥554,825 for AMI-PCI and UA-PCI, respectively, while the lost profit method evaluated AMI-PCI at ¥812,210 and UA-PCI at ¥773,961. The average costs of technical fees calculated according to the three approaches were ¥772,186 for AMI-PCI and ¥566,688 for UA-PCI, which are higher than the existing reimbursements of ¥343,800 and ¥243,800, respectively.

Conclusion

The present study showed that technical fees for PCI did not reflect estimated costs in three approaches. The majority of hospitals in Japan are operating at a loss for medical profit, and these results call into question, the need for a review of the healthcare costs reimbursed by the government.

Lay summary

In Japan, reimbursement prices of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) technical fees are considered to be lower than the actual cost, which can translate to losses for hospitals, especially when complex PCI procedures are performed. We estimated the appropriateness of technical fees using three approaches including 1) costing calculation, 2) survey-based cost estimation, and 3) lost profit methods. The results confirmed that technical fees, which form the core of medical fees, do not reflect estimated costs. It was suggested that this discrepancy has led to a deficit in the structure of Japanese hospitals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Policy and Technology
Health Policy and Technology Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
78
审稿时长
88 days
期刊介绍: Health Policy and Technology (HPT), is the official journal of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM), a cross-disciplinary journal, which focuses on past, present and future health policy and the role of technology in clinical and non-clinical national and international health environments. HPT provides a further excellent way for the FPM to continue to make important national and international contributions to development of policy and practice within medicine and related disciplines. The aim of HPT is to publish relevant, timely and accessible articles and commentaries to support policy-makers, health professionals, health technology providers, patient groups and academia interested in health policy and technology. Topics covered by HPT will include: - Health technology, including drug discovery, diagnostics, medicines, devices, therapeutic delivery and eHealth systems - Cross-national comparisons on health policy using evidence-based approaches - National studies on health policy to determine the outcomes of technology-driven initiatives - Cross-border eHealth including health tourism - The digital divide in mobility, access and affordability of healthcare - Health technology assessment (HTA) methods and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of clinical and non-clinical health technologies - Health and eHealth indicators and benchmarks (measure/metrics) for understanding the adoption and diffusion of health technologies - Health and eHealth models and frameworks to support policy-makers and other stakeholders in decision-making - Stakeholder engagement with health technologies (clinical and patient/citizen buy-in) - Regulation and health economics
×
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