Treatment cost assessment for COVID-19 inpatients in Shenzhen, China 2020-2021: facts and suggestions.

Background: Knowledge regarding the treatment cost of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the real world is vital for disease burden forecasts and health resources planning. However, it is greatly hindered by obtaining reliable cost data from actual patients. To address this knowledge gap, this study aims to estimate the treatment cost and specific cost components for COVID-19 inpatients in Shenzhen city, China in 2020-2021. Methods: It is a 2 years' cross-sectional study. The de-identified discharge claims were collected from the hospital information system (HIS) of COVID-19 designated hospital in Shenzhen, China. One thousand three hundred ninety-eight inpatients with a discharge diagnosis for COVID-19 from January 10, 2020 (the first COVID-19 case admitted in the hospital in Shenzhen) to December 31, 2021. A comparison was made of treatment cost and cost components of COVID-19 inpatients among seven COVID-19 clinical classifications (asymptomatic, mild, moderate, severe, critical, convalescent and re-positive cases) and three admission stages (divided by the implementation of different treatment guidelines). The multi-variable linear regression models were used to conduct the analysis. Results: The treatment cost for included COVID-19 inpatients was USD 3,328.8. The number of convalescent cases accounted for the largest proportion of all COVID-19 inpatients (42.7%). The severe and critical cases incurred more than 40% of treatment cost on western medicine, while the other five COVID-19 clinical classifications spent the largest proportion (32%-51%) on lab testing. Compared with asymptomatic cases, significant increases of treatment cost were observed in mild cases (by 30.0%), moderate cases (by 49.2%), severe cases (by 228.7%) and critical cases (by 680.7%), while reductions were shown in re-positive cases (by 43.1%) and convalescent cases (by 38.6%). The decreasing trend of treatment cost was observed during the latter two stages by 7.6 and 17.9%, respectively. Conclusions: Our findings identified the difference of inpatient treatment cost across seven COVID-19 clinical classifications and the changes at three admission stages. It is highly suggestive to inform the financial burden experienced by the health insurance fund and the Government, to emphasize the rational use of lab tests and western medicine in the COVID-19 treatment guideline, and to design suitable treatment and control policy for convalescent cases.

What Do We Know About Teamwork in Chinese Hospitals? A Systematic Review.

Background and Objective: Improving quality of care is one of the primary goals in current Chinese hospital reforms. Teamwork can play an essential role. Characteristics of teamwork and interventions for improving teamwork in hospitals have been widely studied. However, most of these studies are from a Western context; evidence from China is scarce. Because of the contextual differences between China and Western countries, empirical evidence on teamwork from Western hospitals may have limited validity in China. This systematic review aims to advance the evidence base and understanding of teamwork in Chinese hospitals. Methods: Both English (i.e., Embase, Medline, and Web of Science) and Chinese databases (i.e., CNKI, CQVIP, and Wanfang) were searched for relevant articles until February 6, 2020. We included the studies that empirically researched teamwork in Chinese hospitals. Studies were excluded if they (1) were not conducted in hospitals in Mainland China, (2) did not research teamwork on team interventions, (3) were not empirical, (4) were not written in English or Chinese, (5) were not published in peer-reviewed journals, and (6) were not conducted in teams that provide direct patient care. Both deductive and inductive approaches were used to analyze data. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess their methodological quality. Results: A total of 70 articles (i.e., 39 English articles and 31 Chinese articles) were included. The results are presented in two main categories: Teamwork components and Team interventions. The evidence regarding the relationships among inputs, processes, and outcomes is scarce and mostly inconclusive. The only conclusive evidence shows that females perceive better team processes than males. Similar types of training and tools were introduced as can be found in Western literature, all showing positive effects. In line with the Chinese health reforms, many of the intervention studies regard the introduction of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). The evidence on the implementation of MDTs reveals that they have led to lower complication rates, shorter hospital stays, higher diagnosis accuracy, efficiency improvement, and a variety of better disease-specific clinical outcomes. Evidence on the effect on patient survival is inconclusive. Conclusion: The Chinese studies on teamwork components mainly focus on the input-process relationship. The evidence provided on this relationship is, however, mostly inconclusive. The intervention studies in Chinese hospitals predominantly focus on patient outcomes rather than organizational and employee outcomes. The introduction of training, tools, and MDTs generally shows promising results. The evidence from primary hospitals and rural areas, which are prioritized in the health reforms, is especially scarce. Advancing the evidence base on teamwork, especially in primary hospitals and rural areas, is needed and can inform policy and management to promote the health reform implementation. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020175069, identifier CRD42020175069.