Department of Economics, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Mar 23;10:76. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-76.
The literature comparing private not-for-profit, for-profit, and government providers mostly relies on empirical evidence from high-income and established market economies. Studies from developing and transitional economies remain scarce, especially regarding patient case-mix and quality of care in public and private hospitals, even though countries such as China have expanded a mixed-ownership approach to service delivery. The purpose of this study is to compare the operations and performance of public and private hospitals in Guangdong Province, China, focusing on differences in patient case-mix and quality of care.
We analyze survey data collected from 362 government-owned and private hospitals in Guangdong Province in 2005, combining mandatorily reported administrative data with a survey instrument designed for this study. We use univariate and multi-variate regression analyses to compare hospital characteristics and to identify factors associated with simple measures of structural quality and patient outcomes.
Compared to private hospitals, government hospitals have a higher average value of total assets, more pieces of expensive medical equipment, more employees, and more physicians (controlling for hospital beds, urban location, insurance network, and university affiliation). Government and for-profit private hospitals do not statistically differ in total staffing, although for-profits have proportionally more support staff and fewer medical professionals. Mortality rates for non-government non-profit and for-profit hospitals do not statistically differ from those of government hospitals of similar size, accreditation level, and patient mix.
In combination with other evidence on health service delivery in China, our results suggest that changes in ownership type alone are unlikely to dramatically improve or harm overall quality. System incentives need to be designed to reward desired hospital performance and protect vulnerable patients, regardless of hospital ownership type.
将私人非营利性、营利性和政府提供者进行比较的文献主要依赖于高收入和成熟市场经济体的经验证据。来自发展中和转型经济体的研究仍然很少,特别是关于公共和私立医院的患者病例组合和护理质量,尽管中国等国家已经扩大了混合所有制的服务提供方式。本研究的目的是比较中国广东省的公立医院和私立医院的运营和绩效,重点关注患者病例组合和护理质量的差异。
我们分析了 2005 年从广东省 362 家政府所有和私立医院收集的调查数据,将强制性报告的行政数据与为这项研究设计的调查工具相结合。我们使用单变量和多变量回归分析来比较医院的特征,并确定与结构质量和患者结果的简单衡量标准相关的因素。
与私立医院相比,公立医院的总资产平均值较高,昂贵医疗设备的数量较多,员工和医生较多(控制医院床位、城市位置、保险网络和大学附属关系)。公立医院和营利性私立医院的总人员配置没有统计学差异,尽管营利性医院的支持人员比例较高,医疗专业人员比例较低。非营利性公立医院和营利性医院的死亡率与类似规模、认证水平和患者组合的公立医院没有统计学差异。
结合中国卫生服务提供的其他证据,我们的结果表明,所有制类型的变化不太可能显著提高或损害整体质量。需要设计系统激励措施,以奖励所需的医院绩效,并保护弱势患者,无论医院所有制类型如何。