Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
2.
Eur J Emerg Med ; 30(1): 15-20, 2023 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35989654

ABSTRACT

Health systems invest in coordination and collaboration between emergency departments (ED) and after-hours primary care providers (AHPCs) to alleviate pressure on the acute care chain. There are substantial gaps in the existing evidence, limited in sample size, follow-up care, and costs. We assess whether acute care collaborations (ACCs) are associated with decreased ED utilization, hospital admission rates, and lower costs per patient journey, compared with stand-alone facilities. The design is a quasi-experimental study using claims data. The study included 610 845 patients in the Netherlands (2017). Patient visits in ACCs were compared to stand-alone EDs and AHPCs. The number of comorbidities was similar in both groups. Multiple logistic and gamma regressions were used to determine whether patient visits to ACCs were negatively associated with ED utilization, hospital admission rates, and costs. Logistic regression analysis did not find an association between patients visiting ACCs and ED utilization compared to patients visiting stand-alone facilities [odds ratio (OR), 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.00-1.03]. However, patients in ACCs were associated with an increase in hospital admissions (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.09). ACCs were associated with higher total costs incurred during the patient journey (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03). Collaboration between EDs and AHPCs was not associated with ED utilization, but was associated with increased hospital admission rates, and higher costs. These collaborations do not seem to improve health systems' financial sustainability.


Subject(s)
Health Care Costs , Hospitalization , Humans , Netherlands , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Emergency Service, Hospital , Retrospective Studies
3.
Int J Health Plann Manage ; 34(2): e1312-e1322, 2019 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30977557

ABSTRACT

In a system of managed competition, selective contracting and patient choice reward providers for quality improvements through increases in patient numbers and revenue. We research whether these mechanisms function as envisioned by investigating the relationship between quality improvements and patient numbers in assisted reproduction technology in the Netherlands. Success rate improvements primarily reduce volume as fewer secondary treatments are necessary, but this can be compensated by attracting new patients. Using nationwide registry data from 1996 to 2016, we find limited evidence that high-quality clinics attract new patients, and insufficiently as to compensate for the reduction in secondary treatments. The net effect of quality increases appears to be a small decline in revenue. Therefore, we conclude that patient choice and active purchasing reward quality improvements insufficiently. Nevertheless, clinics have improved quality drastically over the last years, showing that financial incentives are perhaps less important factors for quality improvements than factors such as intrinsic motivation and professional autonomy.


Subject(s)
Managed Competition/organization & administration , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted , Female , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Managed Competition/economics , Models, Statistical , Netherlands , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Dropouts/statistics & numerical data , Pregnancy , Quality Improvement/economics , Registries , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/economics , Reproductive Techniques, Assisted/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
4.
Int J Health Plann Manage ; 33(2): e434-e453, 2018 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29498430

ABSTRACT

European countries have enhanced the scope of private provision within their health care systems. Privatizing services have been suggested as a means to improve access, quality, and efficiency in health care. This raises questions about the relative performance of private hospitals compared with public hospitals. Most systematic reviews that scrutinize the performance of the private hospitals originate from the United States. A systematic overview for Europe is nonexisting. We fill this gap with a systematic realist review comparing the performance of public hospitals to private hospitals on efficiency, accessibility, and quality of care in the European Union. This review synthesizes evidence from Italy, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Greece, Austria, Spain, and Portugal. Most evidence suggests that public hospitals are at least as efficient as or are more efficient than private hospitals. Accessibility to broader populations is often a matter of concern in private provision: Patients with higher social-economic backgrounds hold better access to private hospital provision, especially in private parallel systems such as the United Kingdom and Greece. The existing evidence on quality of care is often too diverse to make a conclusive statement. In conclusion, the growth in private hospital provision seems not related to improvements in performance in Europe. Our evidence further suggests that the private (for-profit) hospital sector seems to react more strongly to (financial) incentives than other provider types. In such cases, policymakers either should very carefully develop adequate incentive structures or be hesitant to accommodate the growth of the private hospital sector.


Subject(s)
Efficiency, Organizational/standards , European Union , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Hospitals, Private , Hospitals, Public , Quality of Health Care/standards , Hospitals, Private/economics , Hospitals, Public/economics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...