School of Public Health, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Key Laboratory of Health Technology Assessment (Fudan University), Ministry of Health, Shanghai, China.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Jun 2;23(1):568. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09553-x.
In 2018, an innovative case-based payment scheme called Diagnosis-Intervention Packet (DIP) was piloted in a large developed city in southern China. This study aimed to investigate the impact of the new payment method on total medical expenditure per case, length of stay (LOS), and in-hospital mortality rate across different hospitals.
We used the de-identified patient-level discharge data of hospitalized patients from 2016 to 2019 in our study city. The interrupted time series model was used to examine the impact of the DIP payment reform on inflation-adjusted total expenditure per case, LOS, and in-hospital mortality rate across different hospitals, which were stratified into different hospital ownerships (public and private) and hospital levels (tertiary, secondary, and primary).
We included 2.08 million and 2.98 million discharge cases of insured patients before and after the DIP payment reform, respectively. The DIP payment reform resulted in a significant increase of the monthly trend of adjusted total expenditure per case in public (1.1%, P = 0.000), tertiary (0.6%, P = 0.000), secondary (0.4%, P = 0.047) and primary hospitals (0.9%, P = 0.039). The monthly trend of LOS increased significantly in public (0.022 days, P = 0.041) and primary (0.235 days, P = 0.032) hospitals. The monthly trend of in-hospital mortality rate decreased significantly in private (0.083 percentage points, P = 0.002) and secondary (0.037 percentage points, P = 0.002) hospitals.
We conclude that implementing the DIP payment reform yields inconsistent consequences across different hospitals. DIP reform encouraged public hospitals and high-level hospitals to treat patients with higher illness severities and requiring high treatment intensity, resulting in a significant increase in total expenditure per case. The inconsistencies between public and private hospitals may be attributed to their different baseline levels prior to the reform and their different responses to the incentives created by the reform.
2018 年,中国南方一个发达大城市试点了一种名为“诊断-干预包(DIP)”的创新基于病例的支付方案。本研究旨在调查新的支付方式对不同医院的病例总医疗支出、住院时间(LOS)和院内死亡率的影响。
我们使用了研究城市 2016 年至 2019 年住院患者的去标识患者级别的出院数据。使用中断时间序列模型来检验 DIP 支付改革对不同医院的病例调整后总支出、LOS 和院内死亡率的影响,这些医院分为不同的所有权(公立和私立)和医院级别(三级、二级和一级)。
我们纳入了 DIP 支付改革前后分别有 208 万和 298 万例参保患者的出院病例。DIP 支付改革导致公立(1.1%,P=0.000)、三级(0.6%,P=0.000)、二级(0.4%,P=0.047)和一级医院(0.9%,P=0.039)的病例调整后总支出月度趋势显著增加。公立(0.022 天,P=0.041)和一级(0.235 天,P=0.032)医院的 LOS 月度趋势显著增加。私立(0.083 个百分点,P=0.002)和二级(0.037 个百分点,P=0.002)医院的院内死亡率月度趋势显著下降。
我们得出结论,实施 DIP 支付改革在不同医院产生了不一致的结果。DIP 改革鼓励公立医院和高等级医院治疗病情更严重、需要高强度治疗的患者,导致病例总支出显著增加。公立和私立医院之间的不一致可能归因于改革前的不同基线水平及其对改革激励措施的不同反应。