Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T19:57:30.373Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reimbursement systems, organisational forms and patient selection: Evidence from day surgery in Norway

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2009

PÅL E. MARTINUSSEN  and
TERJE P. HAGEN
PÅL E. MARTINUSSEN*
Affiliation:
Institute of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo and SINTEF Health Research, Trondheim, Norway
TERJE P. HAGEN
Affiliation:
Institute of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Norway
*
*Corresponding author: Professor Pål E. Martinussen. Institute of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1089 Blindern, N-0317 Oslo, Norway. Email: pal.martinussen@sintef.no
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cream skimming can be defined as the selective treatment of patients that demand few resources while providing high economic refunds. We test whether cream skimming occurs after the introduction of DRG-based activity-based financing (ABF) in Norway in 1997 and if the problem further increased after the 2002 organizational reform when hospitals were turned into trusts. The DRG-system offers the same economic reimbursement for patients classified within day-surgical DRGs irrespective of whether the patient receives same-day treatment or in-patient care over several days. This provides potential for cream skimming and allows us to investigate cream skimming within the actual diagnoses. Patient data from the period 1999-2005 is analyzed. Waiting times are used as indicators of patient selection and analyzed as a function of severity within each diagnosis, controlling for age and gender of the patient, as well as institutional and time-dependent variables. The analysis gives some evidence of cream skimming in the first period of ABF, in particular within the lighter orthopaedic diagnoses. However, cream skimming does not increase after the 2002 organizational reform but is stable, and for some DRGs even reduced. The study indicates that cream skimming may occur if reimbursement systems are not particularly sophisticated. Softening of budget constraints after the hospital reform of 2002 may explain why cream skimming does not increase after the reform. However, further investigation into this mechanism is needed.

Type
Articles
Information
Health Economics, Policy and Law , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 139 - 158
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aasland, O., Hagen, T. P.and Martinussen, P. E. (2007), ‘Sykehuslegenes syn på sykehusreformen’, Tidsskrift for den norske legeforening, 17: 2218–2221.Google Scholar
Ancona-Berk, A. V. and Chalmers, T. C.(1986), ‘An analysis of the costs of ambulatory and inpatient care’, American Journal of Public Health, 76: 1102–1104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barros, P. B. (2003), ‘Cream-skimming, incentives for efficiency and payment system’, Journal of Health Economics, 22: 419–443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biørn, E., Hagen, T. P.Iversen, T.and Magnussen, J.(2003), ‘The effect of activity-based financing on hospital efficiency: a panel data analysis of DEA efficiency scores 1992–2000’, Health Care Management Science, 6: 271–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarke, A. (1996), ‘Why are we trying to reduce length of stay? Evaluation of the costs and benefits of reducing time in hospital must start from the objects that govern the change’, Quality Health Care, 5: 172–179.Google Scholar
de Ven, W. P. M. M and van Vliet, R. C. J. A.(1992), ‘How can we prevent cream skimming in a competitive health insurance market? The great challenge for the 90′s’, in Zweifel, P. and Frech III, H. E. (eds), Health Economics Worldwide, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. P. (1998), ‘Creaming, skimping and dumping: provider competition on the intensive and extensive margins’, Journal of Health Economics, 17: 537–555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frank, R. and Lave, J.(1989), ‘A comparison of hospital responses to reimbursement policies for Medicaid psychiatric patients’, Rand Journal of Economics, 24: 588–600.Google Scholar
Hagen, T. P. and Kaarbøe, O.(2006), ‘The Norwegian Hospital Reform of 2002: Central Government takes over ownership of public hospitals’, Health Policy, 76: 320–333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halvorsen, P. (1999), ‘Presses til å prioritere inntekt fremfor medisin’, Tidsskrift for Den norske lægeforening, 199: 3480–3481.Google Scholar
Haug, C. (2001), ‘Makten flyttes’, Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, 18: 2139.Google Scholar
Heath, P., Ogg, T.Hall, C.and Brownlie, G.(1990), ‘The cost of day surgery’, Health Trends, 22: 109–111.Google Scholar
Hollmann, R., Rotzer, A.and Lange, J.(1994), ‘Ambulatory surgery – a sensible future perspective’, Helvetica Chirurgica Acta, 60: 803–806.Google ScholarPubMed
Janeke, J. B. (1994), ‘Same-day surgery is cost-effective and safe’, South African Medical Journal, 84: 454.Google ScholarPubMed
Johnsen, J. R. (2006), Health Systems in Transition: Norway, Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies.Google Scholar
Jones, P. R. and Cullis, J. G.(1996), ‘Decision making in quasi-markets: a pedagogic analysis’, Journal of Health Economics, 15: 187–208.Google Scholar
Kangas-Saarela, T., Ohukainen, J.and Koivuranta, M.(1998), ‘Patients’ experiences of day surgery – an apporach to quality control’, Ambulatory Surgery, 7: 31–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keithley, J., Glandon, G. L., Llewellyn, J., Berger, B.and Levin, D.(1989), ‘The cost-effectiveness of same-day surgery’, Nursing Economics, 7: 90–93.Google Scholar
Latham, N. K., Jette, D. U.Warren, R. L.and Wirtalla, C.(2006), ‘Patterns of functional change during rehabilitation of patients with hip fracture’, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 87: 111–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lau, H., Poon, J.and Lee, F.(2000), ‘Patient satisfaction after ambulatory inguinal hernia repair in Hong Kong’, Ambulatory Surgery, 8: 115–118.Google Scholar
Le Grand, J. (1991), ‘Quasi-markets and social policy’, The Economic Journal, 101: 1256–1267.Google Scholar
Martinussen, P. E. (2005), ‘Dagkirurgi’, in R. Jørgenvåg (ed.), SAMDATA Hospital Report 1/05, SINTEF Health Research, Trondheim.Google Scholar
Martinussen, P. E. and Midttun, L.(2004), ‘Day surgery and hospital efficiency: empirical analysis of Norwegian hospitals, 1999–2001’, Health Policy, 68: 183–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matsaganis, M. and Glennerster, H.(1994), ‘The threat of “cream skimming” in the post-reform NHS’, Journal of Health Economics, 13: 31–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Midttun, L. and Martinussen, P. E.(2005), ‘Hospital waiting time in Norway: what is the role of organizational change?’, Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 33: 439–446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, M. (1999), ‘Patients’ perceptions of day surgery: a literature review’, Ambulatory Surgery, 7: 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newhouse, J. (1989), ‘Do unprofitable patients face access problems?’, Health Care Financing Review, 11: 32–42.Google ScholarPubMed
Newhouse, J. (1994), ‘Patients at risk: health reform and risk adjustment’, Health Affairs, 1: 132–146.Google Scholar
Newhouse, J. and Byrne, D. J.(1988), ‘Did Medicare's prospective payment cause lengths of stay to fall?’, Journal of Health Economy, 7: 413–416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Øgar, P. (2001), ‘Statlige sykehus – hva så?’, Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, 18: 2189–2191.Google Scholar
Pauly, M. V. (1984), ‘Is cream-skimming a problem for the competitive medical market?’, Journal of Health Economics, 3: 87–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pettengill, J. (2005), ‘Patient selection in Physician-owned specialty hospitals’, Abstract Academy Health Meeting, 22: abstract no. 3814.Google Scholar
Pettersen, I. J. (2001), ‘Fra plan til marked – noen perspektiver på sykehusreformen’, Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, 121: 2186–2188.Google Scholar
Pineault, R., Contandriopoulos, A.-P.Valois, M.Bastian, M.-L.and Lance, J.-M.(1985), ‘Randomized clinical trial of one-day surgery: patient satisfaction, clinical outcomes and costs’, Medical Care, 23: 171–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, B. L., Peterson, G. M.Friesen, W. T.and Beckett, W. G.(1995), ‘An investigation of pain and management following gynaecological day surgery: differences between open and closed surgery’, Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 5: 370–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russel, I. T., Devlin, H. B.Fell, M.Glass, N. J.and Newell, D. J.(1977), ‘Daycase surgery for hernias and haemorrhoids’, Lancet, 1: 844–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tjerbo, T. and Hagen, T. P.(2008), ‘Deficits, soft budget constraints, and bailouts: budgeting after the Norwegian hospital reform’, working paper, Institute of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo.Google Scholar
Van den Pool, M. A., van Houdenhoven, M.Hans, E. W.Boersma, E.Bax, J. J.Feringa, H. H. H.Schouten, O.van Sambeek, M. R. H. M.and Poldermans, D.(2006), ‘Influence of cardiac risk factors and medication on length of hospitalization in patients undergoing major vascular surgery’, The American Journal of Cardiology, 97: 1423–1426.Google Scholar
Vrangbæk, K. and Østergren, K.(2006), ‘Patient empowerment and the introduction of hospital choice in Denmark and Norway’, Health Economics, Policy and Law, 1.Google Scholar
Vrangbæk, K.Østergren, K.Birk, H. O.and Winblad, U.(2007), ‘Patient reactions to hospital choice in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden’, Health Economics, Policy and Law, 2: 125–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weale, A. R. (2002), ‘Randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of emergency day surgery against standard inpatient treatment’, British Journal of Surgery, 89: 423–427.Google Scholar