Literature DB >> 32170666

Estimating the Unit Costs of Healthcare Service Delivery in India: Addressing Information Gaps for Price Setting and Health Technology Assessment.

Pankaj Bahuguna1, Lorna Guinness2, Sameer Sharma1, Akashdeep Singh Chauhan1, Laura Downey3,4, Shankar Prinja5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: India's flagship National Health insurance programme (AB-PMJAY) requires accurate cost information for evidence-based decision-making, strategic purchasing of health services and setting reimbursement rates. To address the challenge of limited health service cost data, this study used econometric methods to identify determinants of cost and estimate unit costs for each Indian state.
METHODS: Using data from 81 facilities in six states, models were developed for inpatient and outpatient services at primary and secondary level public health facilities. A best-fit unit cost function was identified using guided stepwise regression and combined with data on health service infrastructure and utilisation to predict state-level unit costs.
RESULTS: Health service utilisation had the greatest influence on unit cost, while number of beds, facility level and the state were also good predictors. For district hospitals, predicted cost per inpatient admission ranged from 1028 (313-3429) Indian Rupees (INR) to 4499 (1451-14,159) INR and cost per outpatient visit ranged from 91 (44-196) INR to 657 (339-1337) INR, across the states. For community healthcare centres and primary healthcare centres, cost per admission ranged from 412 (148-1151) INR to 3677 (1359-10,055) INR and cost per outpatient visit ranged from 96 (50-187) INR to 429 (217-844) INR.
CONCLUSION: This is the first time cost estimates for inpatient admissions and outpatient visits for all states have been estimated using standardised data. The model demonstrates the usefulness of such an approach in the Indian context to help inform health technology assessment, budgeting and forecasting, as well as differential pricing, and could be applied to similar country contexts where cost data are limited.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32170666     DOI: 10.1007/s40258-020-00566-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy        ISSN: 1175-5652            Impact factor:   2.561


  4 in total

1.  Translating Research to Policy: Setting Provider Payment Rates for Strategic Purchasing under India's National Publicly Financed Health Insurance Scheme.

Authors:  Shankar Prinja; Maninder Pal Singh; Kavitha Rajsekar; Oshima Sachin; Praveen Gedam; Anu Nagar; Balram Bhargava
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2021-01-19       Impact factor: 2.561

2.  Cost of Surgical Care at Public Sector District Hospitals in India: Implications for Universal Health Coverage and Publicly Financed Health Insurance Schemes.

Authors:  Maninder Pal Singh; Shankar Prinja; Kavitha Rajsekar; Praveen Gedam; Vipul Aggarwal; Oshima Sachin; Jyotsna Naik; Ajai Agarwal; Sanjay Kumar; Setu Sinha; Varsha Singh; Prakash Patel; Amit C Patel; Rajendra Joshi; Avijit Hazra; Raghunath Misra; Divya Mehrotra; Sashi Bhusan Biswal; Ankita Panigrahy; Kusum Lata Gaur; Jai Prakash Pankaj; Dharmesh Kumar Sharma; Kondeti Madhavi; Pulaganti Madhusudana; K Narayanasamy; A Chitra; Gajanan D Velhal; Amit S Bhondve; Rakesh Bahl; Amit Sachdeva; Sharminder Kaur; Anu Nagar; Balram Bhargava
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2022-06-22

3.  How much do government and households spend on an episode of hospitalisation in India? A comparison for public and private hospitals in Chhattisgarh state.

Authors:  Samir Garg; Narayan Tripathi; Alok Ranjan; Kirtti Kumar Bebarta
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2022-05-06

4.  Establishing reference costs for the health benefit packages under universal health coverage in India: cost of health services in India (CHSI) protocol.

Authors:  Shankar Prinja; Maninder Pal Singh; Lorna Guinness; Kavitha Rajsekar; Balram Bhargava
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 2.692

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.