Literature DB >> 2725090

Does utilization review reduce unnecessary hospital care and contain costs?

T M Wickizer1, J R Wheeler, P J Feldstein.   

Abstract

Research indicates that approximately one in five hospital admissions is unnecessary or inappropriate, based on accepted clinical criteria. Various cost-containment approaches have been initiated to reduce unnecessary hospital care. Among these approaches, hospital utilization review (UR) has shown promise as a cost-containment strategy. Although third party payers are increasingly relying on UR and similar approaches to contain health care expenditures, little is known about the effects of these efforts. This study analyzes insurance claims data on 223 insured groups for 1984 through 1986 to determine the effects of a UR program instituted by a commercial insurance company. It was found that UR had a significant negative effect on both utilization and expenditures, even after controlling for a large number of factors. Specifically, UR reduced admissions by 13%, inpatient days by 11%, expenditures on routine hospital inpatient services by 7%, expenditures on hospital ancillary services by 9%, and total medical expenditures by 6%. Even though UR reduced the level of utilization and expenditures, it did not appear to influence the rate of change in these areas over time. These findings suggest that hospital UR programs can reduce utilization and expenditures and generate cost savings, thereby helping to improve the efficiency of medical care resources consumption.

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2725090     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-198906000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  16 in total

1.  The impact of utilization management on readmissions among patients with cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  D S Lessler; T M Wickizer
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Review of the utilisation of a university hospital in Barcelona (Spain): evolution 1992-1996.

Authors:  G Navarro; A Prat-Marin; M Asenjo; A Menacho; A Trilla; L Salleras
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 8.082

3.  Hospital-based utilization management: a cross-Canada survey.

Authors:  G Anderson; S B Sheps; K Cardiff
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1990-11-15       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  The impact of preadmission approval and continued stay review on hospital stay and outcome among children and adolescents.

Authors:  S V Eisen; M Griffin; L I Sederer; B Dickey; S M Mirin
Journal:  J Ment Health Adm       Date:  1995

Review 5.  The impact of private utilization management on psychiatric care: a review of the literature.

Authors:  D Hodgkin
Journal:  J Ment Health Adm       Date:  1992

6.  The effects of utilization review on hospital use and expenditures: a covariance analysis.

Authors:  T M Wickizer
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Effect of hospital utilization review on medical expenditures in selected diagnostic areas: an exploratory study.

Authors:  T M Wickizer
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  The Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol is a poor predictor of in-hospital mortality.

Authors:  N A O'Regan; L Healy; M O Cathail; T W Law; G O'Carroll; J Clare; S Timmons; K A O'Connor
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2013-10-30       Impact factor: 1.568

Review 9.  Evaluation of medical audit.

Authors:  M B Robinson
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 3.710

10.  Computerized decision support for concurrent utilization review using the HELP system.

Authors:  B D Nelson; R M Gardner; G Hedrick; P Gould
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1994 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.