Publication: System-Wide Impacts of Hospital Payment Reforms: Evidence from Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia
No Thumbnail Available
Published
2010
ISSN
01676296
Date
2012-03-30
Author(s)
Moreno-Serra, Rodrigo
Editor(s)
Abstract
While there is broad agreement that the way that health care providers are paid affects their performance, the empirical literature on the impacts of provider payment reforms is surprisingly thin. During the 1990s and early 2000s, many European and Central Asian (ECA) countries shifted from paying hospitals through historical budgets to fee-for-service (FFS) or patient-based payment (PBP) methods (mostly variants of diagnosis-related groups, or DRGs). Using panel data on 28 countries over the period 1990-2004, we exploit the phased shift from historical budgets to explore aggregate impacts on hospital throughput, national health spending, and mortality from causes amenable to medical care. We use a regression version of difference-in-differences (DID) and two variants that relax the DID parallel trends assumption. We find that FFS and PBP both increased national health spending, including private (i.e. out-of-pocket) spending. However, they had different effects on inpatient admissions (FFS increased them; PBP had no effect), and average length of stay (FFS had no effect; PBP reduced it). Of the two methods, only PBP appears to have had any beneficial effect on "amenable mortality", but we found significant impacts for only a couple of causes of death, and not in all model specifications.
Link to Data Set
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Citations
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication System-Wide Impacts of Hospital Payment Reforms : Evidence from Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia(2009-07-01)Although there is broad agreement that the way that health care providers are paid affects their performance, the empirical literature on the impacts of provider payment reforms is surprisingly thin. During the 1990s and early 2000s, many European and Central Asian countries shifted from paying hospitals through historical budgets to fee-for-service or patient-based-payment methods (mostly variants of diagnosis-related groups). Using panel data on 28 countries over the period 1990-2004, the authors of this study exploit the phased shift from historical budgets to explore aggregate impacts on hospital throughput, national health spending, and mortality from causes amenable to medical care. They use a regression version of difference-in-differences and two variants that relax the difference-in-differences parallel trends assumption. The results show that fee-for-service and patient-based-payment methods both increased national health spending, including private (out-of-pocket) spending. However, they had different effects on inpatient admissions (fee-for-service increased them; patient-based-payment had no effect), and average length of stay (fee-for-service had no effect; patient-based-payment reduced it). Of the two methods, only patient-based-payment appears to have had any beneficial effect on "amenable mortality," but there were significant impacts for only a couple of causes of death, and not in all model specifications.Publication Europe and Central Asia's Great Post-communist Social Health Insurance Experiment : Aggregate Impacts on Health Sector Outcomes(2009)The post-Communist transition to social health insurance in many of the Central and Eastern European and Central Asian countries provides a unique opportunity to try to answer some of the unresolved issues in the debate over the relative merits of social health insurance and tax-financed health systems. This paper employs regression-based generalizations of the difference-in-differences method on panel data from 28 countries for the period 1990-2004. We find that, controlling for any concurrent provider payment reforms, adoption of social health insurance increased national health spending and hospital activity rates, but did not lead to better health outcomes.Publication Europe and Central Asia's Great Post-Communist Social Health Insurance Experiment : Impacts on Health Sector and Labor Market Outcomes(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2007-10)The post-communist transition to social health insurance in many of the Central and Eastern European and Central Asian countries provides a unique opportunity to try to answer some of the unresolved issues in the debate over the relative merits of social health insurance and tax-financed health systems. This paper employs a regression-based generalization of the difference-in-differences method and instrumental variables on panel data from 28 countries for the period 1990-2004. The authors find that, controlling for any concurrent provider payment reforms, adoption of social health insurance increased national health spending and hospital activity rates, but did not lead to better health outcomes. The authors also find that adoption of social health insurance reduced employment in the economy as a whole and increased unemployment, although it did not apparently increase the size of the informal economy.Publication Social Health Insurance and Labor Market Outcomes : Evidence from Central and Eastern Europe, and Central Asia(2009)OBJECTIVE: The implications of social health insurance (SHI) for labor markets have featured prominently in recent debates over the merits of SHI and general revenue financing. It has been argued that by raising the nonwage component of labor costs, SHI reduces firms' demand for labor, lowers employment levels and net wages, and encourages self-employment and informal working arrangements. At the national level, SHI has been claimed to reduce a country's competitiveness in international markets and to discourage foreign direct investment (FDI). The transition from general revenue finance to SHI that occurred during the 1990s in many of the central and eastern European and central Asian countries provides a unique opportunity to investigate empirically these claims. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We employ regression-based generalizations of difference-in-differences (DID) and instrumental variables (IV) on country-level panel data from 28 countries for the period 1990-2004. FINDINGS: We find that, controlling for gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, SHI increases (gross) wages by 20%, reduces employment (as a share of the population) by 10%, and increases self-employment by 17%. However, we find no significant effects of SHI on unemployment (registered or self-reported), agricultural employment, a widely used measure of the size of the informal economy, or FDI. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY: We do not claim that our results imply that SHI adoption everywhere must necessarily reduce employment and increase self-employment. Nonetheless, our results ought to serve as a warning to those contemplating shifting the financing of health care from general revenues to a SHI system.Publication The Impacts of Public Hospital Autonomization : Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-07)This paper exploits the staggered rollout of Vietnam s hospital autonomization policy to estimate its impacts on several key health sector outcomes including hospital efficiency, use of hospital care, and out-of-pocket spending. The authors use six years of panel data covering all Vietnam s public hospitals, and three stacked cross-sections of household data. Autonomization probably led to more hospital admissions and outpatient department visits, although the effects are not large. It did not, however, affect bed stocks or bed-occupancy rates. Nor did it increase hospital efficiency. Oddly, despite the volume effects and the unchanged cost structure, the analysis does not find any evidence of autonomization leading to higher total costs. It does, however, find some evidence that autonomization led to higher out-of-pocket spending on hospital care, and higher spending per treatment episode; the effects vary in size depending on the data source and hospital type, but some are quite large -- around 20 percent. Autonomy did not apparently affect in-hospital death rates or complications, but in lower-level hospitals it did lead to more intensive style of care, with more lab tests and imaging per case.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
No results found.