Literature DB >> 19195409

Should prospective payments be differentiated for public and private healthcare providers?

Anne Mason1, Andrew Street, Marisa Miraldo, Luigi Siciliani.   

Abstract

The English government has encouraged private providers - known as Independent Sector Treatment Centres (ISTCs) - to treat publicly funded (NHS) patients. All providers are to be remunerated under a prospective payment system that offers a price per case treated, adjusted by the Market Forces Factor (MFF) to reflect geographical variation in specific input costs. This payment system presupposes that any remaining cost differentials between providers result from inefficiencies. However, the validity of this assumption is unclear. This article describes the constraints that could cause public and private provider costs to differ for reasons outside their control. These constraints may be regulatory in nature, such as taxes and performance management regimens, or relate to the production process, such as input costs, the provision of emergency care, and case mix issues. Most of these exogenous cost differentials can be rectified by adjustments either to the regulatory system or to the payment method. However, differences in capital costs appear less tractable and further investigation into possible solutions is warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19195409     DOI: 10.1017/S1744133109004873

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ Policy Law        ISSN: 1744-1331


  2 in total

1.  Assessing DRG cost accounting with respect to resource allocation and tariff calculation: the case of Germany.

Authors:  Matthias Vogl
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2012-08-30

2.  How should hospital reimbursement be refined to support concentration of complex care services?

Authors:  Chris Bojke; Katja Grašič; Andrew Street
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 3.046

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.