Department of Leisure Business Management, NanKai Institute of Technology, 568 Chung Cheng Road, Tsao Tun, 542, Nan Tou County, Taiwan, Republic of China.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2008 Jun;8(3):301-8. doi: 10.1586/14737167.8.3.301.
This paper provides theoretical analyses of two alternative hospital payment systems for controlling medical cost: the Global Budget Payment System (GBPS) and the Prospective Payment System (PPS). The former method assigns a fixed total budget for all healthcare services over a given period with hospitals being paid on a fee-for-service basis. The latter method is usually connected with a fixed payment to hospitals within a Diagnosis-Related Group. Our results demonstrate that, given the same expenditure, the GBPS would approach optimal levels of quality and efficiency as well as the level of social welfare provided by the PPS, as long as market competition is sufficiently high; our results also demonstrate that the treadmill effect, modeling an inverse relationship between price and quantity under the GBPS, would be a quality-enhancing and efficiency-improving outcome due to market competition.
全球预算支付制度(GBPS)和前瞻性支付制度(PPS)。前者为给定时期内的所有医疗服务分配固定的总预算,医院按服务收费。后者通常与诊断相关组内医院的固定付款有关。我们的研究结果表明,只要市场竞争足够激烈,在相同支出下,GBPS 将接近 PPS 提供的质量和效率以及社会福利水平;我们的研究结果还表明,跑步机效应(在 GBPS 下价格和数量之间的反比关系)将是一种因市场竞争而提高质量和提高效率的结果。