PRINCIPLES: Reimbursement for inpatient treatment in Switzerland is in transition. While hospitals in some cantons already use Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG) based systems for hospital financing, others use fee-for-service (FFS) based systems, a situation that provides the opportunity to perform a head-to-head comparison between the two reimbursement systems. The aim of this analysis was to compare reimbursement systems with regard to length of hospital stay (LOS) and patient outcomes in a cohort of community-acquired pneumonia patients from a previous prospective multicentre study in Switzerland. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of 925 patients with community-acquired pneumonia from a previous randomised-controlled trial. We calculated multivariate regression models adjusted for age, gender, comorbidities and severity of illness (using the Pneumonia Severity Index) and accounting for clustering within hospitals to compare LOS and outcomes between FFS (n = 4) or DRG hospitals (n = 2). RESULTS: LOS in DRG hospitals was significantly shorter compared to FFS hospitals (8.4 vs 10.3 days, absolute difference 1.9 days [95%CI 0.8-3.1]). This was confirmed in multivariate adjusted Cox models (hazard ratio 1.2 [95% 1.1-1.3]). There were no differences in 30-day and 18-month mortality rates (adjusted odds ratio 1.7 [95% 0.9-3.2] and 1.3 [95% 0.9-1.9]) or recurrence rates within 30 days (adjusted odds ratio 0.8 [95% 0.4-1.7]). Also, no differences were found in the rate of still ongoing clinical symptoms at 30 days, satisfaction with the discharge process and quality of life measures at 30 days of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study focusing on community-acquired pneumonia patients with different severities found a 20% shorter LOS in hospitals with DRG financing compared to FFS hospitals without apparent harmful effects on patient outcomes, satisfaction with care and different quality of life measures. Further studies are required to validate these findings for other medical and surgical patient populations.
PRINCIPLES: Reimbursement for inpatient treatment in Switzerland is in transition. While hospitals in some cantons already use Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG) based systems for hospital financing, others use fee-for-service (FFS) based systems, a situation that provides the opportunity to perform a head-to-head comparison between the two reimbursement systems. The aim of this analysis was to compare reimbursement systems with regard to length of hospital stay (LOS) and patient outcomes in a cohort of community-acquired pneumoniapatients from a previous prospective multicentre study in Switzerland. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of 925 patients with community-acquired pneumonia from a previous randomised-controlled trial. We calculated multivariate regression models adjusted for age, gender, comorbidities and severity of illness (using the Pneumonia Severity Index) and accounting for clustering within hospitals to compare LOS and outcomes between FFS (n = 4) or DRG hospitals (n = 2). RESULTS: LOS in DRG hospitals was significantly shorter compared to FFS hospitals (8.4 vs 10.3 days, absolute difference 1.9 days [95%CI 0.8-3.1]). This was confirmed in multivariate adjusted Cox models (hazard ratio 1.2 [95% 1.1-1.3]). There were no differences in 30-day and 18-month mortality rates (adjusted odds ratio 1.7 [95% 0.9-3.2] and 1.3 [95% 0.9-1.9]) or recurrence rates within 30 days (adjusted odds ratio 0.8 [95% 0.4-1.7]). Also, no differences were found in the rate of still ongoing clinical symptoms at 30 days, satisfaction with the discharge process and quality of life measures at 30 days of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study focusing on community-acquired pneumoniapatients with different severities found a 20% shorter LOS in hospitals with DRG financing compared to FFS hospitals without apparent harmful effects on patient outcomes, satisfaction with care and different quality of life measures. Further studies are required to validate these findings for other medical and surgical patient populations.
Authors: Philipp Schuetz; Pierre Hausfater; Devendra Amin; Sebastian Haubitz; Lukas Fässler; Eva Grolimund; Alexander Kutz; Ursula Schild; Zeljka Caldara; Katharina Regez; Andriy Zhydkov; Timo Kahles; Krassen Nedeltchev; Stefanie von Felten; Sabina De Geest; Antoinette Conca; Petra Schäfer-Keller; Andreas Huber; Mario Bargetzi; Ulrich Buergi; Gabrielle Sauvin; Pasqualina Perrig-Chiello; Barbara Reutlinger; Beat Mueller Journal: BMC Emerg Med Date: 2013-07-04
Authors: Karen S Palmer; Thomas Agoritsas; Danielle Martin; Taryn Scott; Sohail M Mulla; Ashley P Miller; Arnav Agarwal; Andrew Bresnahan; Afeez Abiola Hazzan; Rebecca A Jeffery; Arnaud Merglen; Ahmed Negm; Reed A Siemieniuk; Neera Bhatnagar; Irfan A Dhalla; John N Lavis; John J You; Stephen J Duckett; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-10-27 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Manuela Nickler; Manuel Ottiger; Christian Steuer; Andreas Huber; Janet Byron Anderson; Beat Müller; Philipp Schuetz Journal: Respir Res Date: 2015-10-15
Authors: Lionel Chok; Esther B Bachli; Peter Steiger; Dominique Bettex; Silvia R Cottini; Emanuela Keller; Marco Maggiorini; Reto A Schuepbach Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-02-05 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Susanne Burgemeister; Alexander Kutz; Antoinette Conca; Thomas Holler; Sebastian Haubitz; Andreas Huber; Ulrich Buergi; Beat Mueller; Philipp Schuetz Journal: Open Access Emerg Med Date: 2017-10-24
Authors: Tenzin Wangmo; Yvonne Padrutt; Insa Koné; Thomas Gächter; Bernice S Elger; Agnes Leu Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-06-13 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Clare Jamookeeah; Paul Robinson; Karl O'Reilly; Johan Lundberg; Martin Gisby; Michael Ländin; Jakob Skov; David Trueman Journal: BMC Endocr Disord Date: 2016-05-16 Impact factor: 2.763
Authors: Ryan O'Reilly; Sayako Yokoyama; Justin Boyle; Jeffrey C Kwong; Allison McGeer; Teresa To; Beate Sander Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-07-17 Impact factor: 4.147