Search

In complex health systems with growing healthcare spending, combining reimbursement systems that incentivize cost‐efficient healthcare provision within and across care sectors is key. This study investigates whether dual reimbursement systems lead hospitals to offset financial pressures in one care sector by inducing demand in another. We find that hospital imaging units induced demand for costly and unnecessary ambulatory imaging examinations reimbursed under fee‐for‐service, following a reform that introduced prospective payment and increased competition in the inpatient sector in Switzerland in 2012. Market structure, competitive pressures, and price regulations also influence demand inducement by varying the response to the reform. Reimbursement systems can influence supplier‐induced demand in other care sectors within hospitals where revenue is tied to the intensity of care provision. In particular, the possibility to self‐refer patients to high‐margin diagnostic examinations bears negative consequences on healthcare expenditures and potentially patient health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient non-attendance can lead to worse health outcomes and longer waiting times. In the English National Health Service, around 7% of patients who are referred by their general practice for a hospital outpatient appointment fail to attend. An electronic booking system (Choose and Book-C&B) for general practices making hospital outpatient appointments was introduced in England in 2005 and by 2009 accounted for 50% of appointments. It was intended, inter alia, to reduce the rate of non-attendance. Using a 2004-2009 panel with 7,900 English general practices, allowing for the relaxation of constraints on patient of hospital, and for the potential endogeneity of use of C&B, we estimate that the introduction of C&B reduced non-attendance by referred patients in 2009 by 72,160 (8.7%). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate whether better management of chronic conditions by family practices reduces mortality risk.Data: Two random samples of 5 million patients registered with over 8,000 English family practices followed up for 4 years (2004/5-2007/8). Measures of the quality of disease management for 10 conditions were constructed for each family practice for each year. The outcome measure was an indicator taking the value 1 if the patient died during a specified year, 0 otherwise.Study Design: Cross-section and multilevel panel data multiple logistic regressions were estimated. Covariates included age, gender, morbidity, hospitalizations, attributed socio-economic characteristics, and local health care supply measures.Principal Findings: Although a composite measure of the quality of disease management for all 10 conditions was significantly associated with lower mortality, only the quality of stroke care was significant when all 10 quality measures were entered in the regression.Conclusions: The panel data results suggest that a 1 percent improvement in the quality of stroke care could reduce the annual number of deaths in England by 782 [95 percent CI: 423, 1140]. A longer study period may be necessary to detect any mortality impact of better management of other conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate the association between indicators of quality of diabetic management in English family practices and emergency hospital admissions for short-term complications of diabetes. A total of 8,223 English family practices from 2001/2002 to 2006/2007. Multiple regression analyses of associations between admissions and proportions of practice diabetic patients with good (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] ≤7.4 percent) and moderate (7.4 percent

Under the UK fundholding scheme, general practices could elect to hold a budget to meet the costs of some types of elective surgery (chargeable admissions) for their patients. It was alleged that patients of fundholding practices had shorter waits for elective surgery than the patients of non-fundholders. Comparison of waiting times between fundholding and non-fundholding practices are potentially confounded by selection bias as fundholding was voluntary. We estimate the effect of a practice's fundholding status on the waiting times of its patients using both cross-sectional methods (OLS, propensity score, instrumental variables, Heckman selection correction and Heckman heterogenous effects estimators) and difference in differences methodologies to correct for selection bias. The estimated effect of fundholding status was to significantly reduce the waiting times for chargeable admissions of the patients of fundholders by 4.1-6.6% (or 4-7 days) with the instrumental variables and Heckman selection correction estimators yielding the highest estimates. We also find that patients of fundholding practices had shorter waits (by 3.7% or 2 days) for non-chargeable elective admissions, suggesting that fundholders were able to obtain shorter waits for all types of elective admissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]