Impacts of Hospital Payment Based on Diagnosis Related Groups (DRGs) with Global Budget on Resource Use and Quality of Care: A Case Study in China
-
Suwei YUAN
,
Wenwei LIU
,
Fengqing WEI
,
Haichen ZHANG
,
Suping WANG
,
Weijun ZHU
,
Jin MA
Abstract
Background: China has implemented numerous pilots to shift its hospital payment mechanism from the traditional retrospective cost-based system to prospective diagnosis-related-group (DRG) -based system. This study investigated the impact of the DRG payment reform with global budget in Zhongshan, China.
Methods: A total of 2895 patients diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) were selected from local two largest tertiary hospitals, among which 727 were discharged prior to the payment reform and 2168 afterwards. Difference-in-difference (DID) regression models were used to evaluate the policy effects on patients’ percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) use, hospital expenditures, in-hospital mortality, and readmission rates within 30 days after discharge.
Results: Patients’ PCI use and hospital expenditures increased quickly after the payment reform. With patients with no local insurance scheme as reference, PCI use for local insured patients decreased significantly by 4.55 percent (95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 0.23, 0.72), meanwhile the total hospital expenses decreased significantly by US$986.10 (b=-0.15, P=0.0037) after reform. No changes were observed with patients’ hospital mortality and readmission rates in our study.
Conclusion: The innovative DRG-based payment reform in Zhongshan suggested a positive effect on AMI patient’s cost containment but negative effect on encouraging resource use. It had no impacts on patients’ care quality. Cost shifting consequence from the insured to the uninsured was observed. More evidence of the impacts of the DRG-based payment in China’s health scenario is needed before it is generalized nationwide.
2. Moreno-Serra R, Wagstaff A (2010). System-wide impacts of hospital payment re-forms: Evidence from Central and East-ern Europe and Central Asia. J Health Econ, 29(4):585-602.
3. Baxter PE, Hewko SJ, Pfaff KA, et al (2015). Leaders' experiences and perceptions implementing activity-based funding and pay-for-performance hospital funding models: A systematic review. Health Policy, 119(8):1096-110.
4. Palmer KS, Agoritsas T, Martin D, et al. (2014). Activity-Based Funding of Hospi-tals and Its Impact on Mortality, Read-mission, Discharge Destination, Severity of Illness, and Volume of Care: A Sys-tematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Plos One, 9(10):e109975.
5. Mathauer I, Wittenbecher F (2013). Hospital payment systems based on diagnosis-related groups: experiences in low- and middle-income countries. Bull World Health Organ, 91(10):746-756A.
6. Bellavia M, Tomasello G, Damiani P, et al (2012). Towards An Improvement of Hospital Services and Streamlining of Health Care Costs: The DRG Analysis in Italy. Iran J Public Health, 41(7):1-6.
7. Yip WC, Hsiao WC, Chen W, et al (2012). Early appraisal of China's huge and complex health-care reforms. Lancet, 379(9818):833-42.
8. National Development and Reform Com-mission (NDRC). Document about the concerning problems of implementing the case payment pilot reform. 2011. Available from: http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2011-04/07/content_1839370.htm
9. National Development and Reform Com-mission (NDRC). Notice of deepening the case payment reform in China. 2017. Available from: http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/zcfb/zcfbtz/201701/t20170116_835180.html
10. Cui QC, Wang ZX, Jiang W (2016). Ten years reform of simplified DRG-based hospital payment system: a systematic re-view. Chin J of Evid-based Med, 16(9):1104-11.
11. Jian W, Lu M, Chan KY, et al (2015). Pay-ment Reform Pilot In Beijing Hospitals Reduced Expenditures And Out-Of-Pocket Payments Per Admission. Health Aff, 34(10):1745-52.
12. Li J, Du Q, Xiang J (2018). Current situation analysis of reform on medical insurance payment mode in county-level public hospitals in Shandong province. Chinese Hospital Management, 38(1):59-61.
13. Lu Y, Meng Q (2014). Summarizing the Study on the Incentives Mechanism of Supplier Payment Reform Influencing the Physician Behavior. Chinese Health Econom-ics, 33(2):36-8.
14. Hamada H, Sekimoto M, Imanaka Y (2012). Effects of the per diem prospective pay-ment system with DRG-like grouping system (DPC/PDPS) on resource usage and healthcare quality in Japan. Health Pol-icy, 107(2-3):194-201.
15. Kruse GB, Polsky D, Stuart EA, et al (2012). The Impact of Hospital Pay-for-Performance on Hospital and Medicare Costs. Health Serv Res, 47(6):2118-36.
16. Sato B, Yoshikawa D, Ishii H, et al (2013). Indoxyl sulfate, a uremic toxin, and carot-id intima-media thickness in patients with coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiol, 163(2):214-6.
17. Farrar S, Yi D, Sutton M, et al. (2009). Has payment by results affected the way that English hospitals provide care? Differ-ence-in-differences analysis. BMJ, 339:b3047.
18. Hoff TJ, McCaffrey DP (1996). Adapting, resisting, and negotiating: How physi-cians cope with organizational and eco-nomic change. Work and Occupations, 23(2):165-89.
19. Zhiyan Consulting Co. (2017). Report on the market operation situation and devel-opment prospect of coronary artery stents in China 2017-2023. Available from: http://www.chyxx.com/research/201709/567781.html
20. Yuan S, Liu Y, Li N, et al (2014). Impacts of Health Insurance Benefit Design on Per-cutaneous Coronary Intervention Use and Inpatient Costs among Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction in Shanghai, China. Pharmacoeconomics, 32(3):265-75.
21. Klein-Hitpass U, Scheller-Kreinsen D (2015). Policy trends and reforms in the German DRG-based hospital payment system. Health Policy, 119(3):252-7.
22. Schreyögg J, Stargardt T, Tiemann O, et al (2006). Methods to determine reim-bursement rates for diagnosis related groups (DRG): A comparison of nine European countries. Health Care Manag Sci. 9(3):215-23.
23. Mikkola H, Keskimäki I, Häkkinen U (2002). DRG-related prices applied in a public health care system-can Finland learn from Norway and Sweden? Health Policy, 59(1):37-51.
24. Magnussen J, Hagen TP, Kaarboe OM (2007). Centralized or decentralized? A case study of Norwegian hospital reform. Soc Sci Med, 64(10):2129-37.
25. Zhang JL (2010). The impact of a diagnosis-related group-based prospective payment experiment: the experience of Shanghai. Applied Economics Letters, 17:1797-803.
26. Council TS. Guiding opinion of further deepening the basic health insurance payment reform. 2017.
27. Zhao C, Wang C, Shen C, et al (2018). Di-agnosis-related group (DRG)-based case-mix funding system, a promising alterna-tive for fee for service payment in China. Biosci Trends, 12(2):109-15.
28. Yuan B, He L, Meng Q, et al. (2017). Pay-ment methods for outpatient care facili-ties (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 3:D11153.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 48 No 2 (2019) | |
| Section | Original Article(s) | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v48i2.818 | |
| Keywords | ||
| Diagnosis-related-groups (DRGs Global budget Hospital payment reform China | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
