不同支付系统下移动医疗对慢性病管理的承诺

Balaraman Rajan, Arvind Sainathan, Saligrama R. Agnihothri, Leon Cui
{"title":"不同支付系统下移动医疗对慢性病管理的承诺","authors":"Balaraman Rajan, Arvind Sainathan, Saligrama R. Agnihothri, Leon Cui","doi":"10.1287/msom.2022.1143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Problem definition: Rapid innovations in technology have created opportunities for different modes of healthcare delivery including digital services provided via mobile applications (mHealth). mHealth technology has the potential to provide efficient, effective, and patient-centered healthcare to manage chronic conditions. However, the economics associated with the adoption and integration of mHealth into the care delivery process is not well understood. In a chronic care clinical practice setting, we investigate fee-for-service (FFS) and capitation payment systems, and explore their performance in a traditional office-visit mode and in a mHealth-adopted mode. We identify conditions under which it is preferable to switch to an mHealth-based practice from an office visit-based practice. Methodology/results: We use an analytical model to track the progression of a chronic disease and formulate an optimization problem in which the clinic decides the time between scheduled visits and patient panel size. We consider many patient-doctor interaction factors including the risk-index of patients, the cost of being sick, and the effectiveness of treatment. We measure the performance based on four different criteria: physician net revenue, physician panel size, total patient utility, and payor net revenue. Although patients may find mHealth mode to be very beneficial, physicians under an FFS system may only adopt mHealth for moderately risky patients but for neither low-risk nor high-risk patients. Capitation clinics are likely to adopt mHealth (higher net revenue) even if the technology is moderately effective. Importantly, mHealth is preferred by patients (higher total utility) and policy makers (greater coverage) when the clinic serves moderate-risk or high-risk patients. Managerial implications: Chronic conditions need continuous care management and use of mHealth has been very promising. However, adoption of mHealth by healthcare providers has been very slow. Our research explores payment systems, physician incentives, and optimal conditions for mHealth to achieve its full potential.","PeriodicalId":18108,"journal":{"name":"Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag.","volume":"64 2","pages":"3158-3176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Promise of mHealth for Chronic Disease Management Under Different Payment Systems\",\"authors\":\"Balaraman Rajan, Arvind Sainathan, Saligrama R. Agnihothri, Leon Cui\",\"doi\":\"10.1287/msom.2022.1143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Problem definition: Rapid innovations in technology have created opportunities for different modes of healthcare delivery including digital services provided via mobile applications (mHealth). mHealth technology has the potential to provide efficient, effective, and patient-centered healthcare to manage chronic conditions. However, the economics associated with the adoption and integration of mHealth into the care delivery process is not well understood. In a chronic care clinical practice setting, we investigate fee-for-service (FFS) and capitation payment systems, and explore their performance in a traditional office-visit mode and in a mHealth-adopted mode. We identify conditions under which it is preferable to switch to an mHealth-based practice from an office visit-based practice. Methodology/results: We use an analytical model to track the progression of a chronic disease and formulate an optimization problem in which the clinic decides the time between scheduled visits and patient panel size. We consider many patient-doctor interaction factors including the risk-index of patients, the cost of being sick, and the effectiveness of treatment. We measure the performance based on four different criteria: physician net revenue, physician panel size, total patient utility, and payor net revenue. Although patients may find mHealth mode to be very beneficial, physicians under an FFS system may only adopt mHealth for moderately risky patients but for neither low-risk nor high-risk patients. Capitation clinics are likely to adopt mHealth (higher net revenue) even if the technology is moderately effective. Importantly, mHealth is preferred by patients (higher total utility) and policy makers (greater coverage) when the clinic serves moderate-risk or high-risk patients. Managerial implications: Chronic conditions need continuous care management and use of mHealth has been very promising. However, adoption of mHealth by healthcare providers has been very slow. Our research explores payment systems, physician incentives, and optimal conditions for mHealth to achieve its full potential.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18108,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag.\",\"volume\":\"64 2\",\"pages\":\"3158-3176\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.1143\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.1143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

问题定义:技术的快速创新为不同的医疗保健提供模式创造了机会,包括通过移动应用程序提供的数字服务(移动医疗)。移动医疗技术有潜力提供高效、有效和以患者为中心的医疗保健来管理慢性病。然而,与采用移动医疗并将其整合到医疗服务过程中相关的经济学尚未得到很好的理解。在慢性护理临床实践环境中,我们调查了按服务收费(FFS)和按人头支付系统,并探讨了它们在传统的办公室就诊模式和采用移动健康模式下的表现。我们确定了在哪些条件下更适合从基于办公室就诊的实践转向基于移动健康的实践。方法/结果:我们使用一个分析模型来跟踪慢性病的进展,并制定一个优化问题,其中诊所决定计划就诊的时间间隔和患者小组的规模。我们考虑了许多医患互动因素,包括患者的风险指数、患病的成本和治疗的有效性。我们基于四个不同的标准来衡量绩效:医生净收入、医生小组规模、患者总效用和付款人净收入。虽然患者可能会发现移动健康模式非常有益,但在FFS系统下的医生可能只对中等风险患者采用移动健康,而对低风险和高风险患者则不采用移动健康。人头诊所可能会采用移动医疗(净收入更高),即使该技术的效果一般。重要的是,当诊所服务于中等风险或高风险患者时,患者(更高的总效用)和决策者(更大的覆盖范围)更喜欢移动医疗。管理意义:慢性病需要持续的护理管理和使用移动医疗是非常有前途的。然而,医疗保健提供者采用移动医疗的速度非常缓慢。我们的研究探讨了支付系统、医生激励和移动医疗的最佳条件,以充分发挥其潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Promise of mHealth for Chronic Disease Management Under Different Payment Systems
Problem definition: Rapid innovations in technology have created opportunities for different modes of healthcare delivery including digital services provided via mobile applications (mHealth). mHealth technology has the potential to provide efficient, effective, and patient-centered healthcare to manage chronic conditions. However, the economics associated with the adoption and integration of mHealth into the care delivery process is not well understood. In a chronic care clinical practice setting, we investigate fee-for-service (FFS) and capitation payment systems, and explore their performance in a traditional office-visit mode and in a mHealth-adopted mode. We identify conditions under which it is preferable to switch to an mHealth-based practice from an office visit-based practice. Methodology/results: We use an analytical model to track the progression of a chronic disease and formulate an optimization problem in which the clinic decides the time between scheduled visits and patient panel size. We consider many patient-doctor interaction factors including the risk-index of patients, the cost of being sick, and the effectiveness of treatment. We measure the performance based on four different criteria: physician net revenue, physician panel size, total patient utility, and payor net revenue. Although patients may find mHealth mode to be very beneficial, physicians under an FFS system may only adopt mHealth for moderately risky patients but for neither low-risk nor high-risk patients. Capitation clinics are likely to adopt mHealth (higher net revenue) even if the technology is moderately effective. Importantly, mHealth is preferred by patients (higher total utility) and policy makers (greater coverage) when the clinic serves moderate-risk or high-risk patients. Managerial implications: Chronic conditions need continuous care management and use of mHealth has been very promising. However, adoption of mHealth by healthcare providers has been very slow. Our research explores payment systems, physician incentives, and optimal conditions for mHealth to achieve its full potential.
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
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