Inama Giuseppe, Claus Marco, Nossai Wanda S Pinna, Pedrinazzi Claudio, Durin Ornella, Catanoso Antonio, Cacucci Michele, Valentini Paolo, Rizzini Angelo Lodi, Agricola Pietro, Romagnoli Giulio, Magarini Anna Maria, Bruni Ezio, Aguzzi Regolo, Soccini Fulvio, Maltagliati Diego
U. O. di Cardiologia, A.O. Ospedale Maggiore di Crema, Crema.
G Ital Cardiol (Rome). 2008 Apr;9(4):262-9.
The aim of this study was to compare the economic impact and results achieved by recourse to outsourced management of the procedures carried out in the electrophysiology and catheterization laboratory of the Department of Cardiology of the Crema Hospital with the in-house setting up and operation of the same activities.
The comparison between the two possible options, "make" or "buy in", was made using the methodology of advanced direct costing, which provides for the allocation of only direct fixed and variable costs to clinical procedures, the subject of calculation. In addition to the financial evaluation, the quality variables showing the advantages and limitations of outsourcing in terms of organizational improvements, streamlining of the organizational structure, operational efficiency and improvement of the quality of service, were examined.
The financial evaluation from 2002 to 2006 came out in favor of "make" as opposed to "buy in". Income derived from diagnosis-related-group payments for the more than 4000 procedures carried out was Euro26.239.034,96. On the basis of the economical evaluation the second contribution margin was slightly inferior with the "buy in" than with the "make" hypothesis. Specifically, it is Euro16.397.669,96 in the "buy in" and Euro16.753.579,16 in the "make" hypothesis, with a difference of Euro355.909,20 (-2%).
The economic advantage lies with the "make" alternative compared with "buy in", nevertheless, outsourcing offers greater operational efficiency, better cost control, setting up of the laboratory within a very short time, simplified administration (single point of contact) and an opportunity to concentrate on core business. However, there are limitations due to greater dependence on the supplier, not all the equipment provided for under the contract was used, and loss of management know-how in non-core business areas.
本研究的目的是比较克雷马医院心脏病学系电生理和导管插入实验室采用外包管理程序与内部开展相同活动所产生的经济影响和取得的成果。
采用先进直接成本核算方法对“自制”或“外购”这两种可能的选择进行比较,该方法规定仅将直接固定成本和可变成本分配到作为计算对象的临床程序中。除了财务评估外,还考察了质量变量,这些变量显示了外包在组织改进、组织结构精简、运营效率和服务质量提升方面的优势和局限性。
2002年至2006年的财务评估结果显示支持“自制”而非“外购”。超过4000例手术的诊断相关组支付所得收入为26239034.96欧元。基于经济评估,“外购”的第二个边际贡献略低于“自制”假设。具体而言,“外购”为16397669.96欧元,“自制”假设为16753579.16欧元,相差355909.20欧元(-2%)。
与“外购”相比,“自制”具有经济优势,然而,外包提供了更高的运营效率、更好的成本控制、在极短时间内建立实验室、简化管理(单一联络点)以及专注于核心业务的机会。然而,由于对外包商的更大依赖、合同规定提供的并非所有设备都被使用以及非核心业务领域管理知识的流失,存在一定局限性。