Muller C F, Otelsberg J
Med Care. 1980 Nov;18(11):1127-45. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198011000-00005.
A simulation approach was used to compare the effects of different methods of determining reasonable charges for physicians' services under Medicare on government outlays, physician revenues, and beneficiaries' financial burdens. This is an important policy area because of fee inflation and rises in physician income. Queens County claims for 1976 and 1977 were used for this analysis. The different methods that were compared to the current method, which is the 75h percentile of weighted customary charges adjusted for the Economic Index, included a single prevailing that dispensed with specialty groupings, an unadjusted prevailing eliminating the Economic Index correction, and average reasonable charges in a base year computed with and without regard for specialty board certification. The results of the trials showed that program costs are about 8 per cent higher without the Economic Index. The single prevailing cuts government costs but substantially raises beneficiaries' out-of-pocket costs. Patients not receiving assignment were most likely to have greater burdens. The average reasonable charge approach had little effect on any of the participants and does not justify the additional expense of the shift in computer programs. As a fee schedule approach would probably use single prevailing prices, the fact that socially undesirable results are generated is significant.
采用模拟方法比较了医疗保险制度下确定医生服务合理收费的不同方法对政府支出、医生收入和受益人的经济负担的影响。由于费用通胀和医生收入增加,这是一个重要的政策领域。本分析使用了皇后区1976年和1977年的索赔数据。与当前方法(即根据经济指数调整的加权习惯收费的第75百分位数)相比的不同方法包括:一种取消专业分组的单一现行收费标准、一种取消经济指数校正的未调整现行收费标准,以及在计算基准年平均合理收费时考虑和不考虑专业委员会认证的情况。试验结果表明,不采用经济指数时,项目成本约高8%。单一现行收费标准降低了政府成本,但大幅提高了受益人的自付成本。未接受指派的患者负担可能最重。平均合理收费方法对任何参与者的影响都很小,且无法证明计算机程序转换产生的额外费用是合理的。由于收费表方法可能会采用单一现行价格,因此产生社会不良结果这一事实意义重大。