Inequalities in public funding: Are hospital-based dental services funding models in Australia logical?

IF 1.7 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH World Medical & Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-01-07 DOI:10.1002/wmh3.595
Pritam Daniel Sundaresan, Estie Kruger, John Mc Geachie, Marc Tennant
{"title":"Inequalities in public funding: Are hospital-based dental services funding models in Australia logical?","authors":"Pritam Daniel Sundaresan, Estie Kruger, John Mc Geachie, Marc Tennant","doi":"10.1002/wmh3.595","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The availability of hospital-based dental services across Australia varies with a number of hospitals disestablishing dental departments due to rising costs. However, the perceived costs are difficult to quantify as funding models used to capture activity are not uniform across health facilities. To investigate this the predicted funding generated using current models of activity-based funding in the provision of specialist dentistry in Australian public hospitals was examined. Using data from Fiona Stanley Hospital regarding the dental treatment for head and neck cancer patients as part of their work-up for cancer management, expected funding was estimated using the existing fee-for-service and capped-fee models currently in use. Funding estimates were based on the Department of Veterans' Affairs Fee Schedule of Dental Services and the Independent Hospital Pricing Authority's Australian Non-Admitted Care Classification. A total of 127 patients received dental treatment over 209 appointments including 17 patients who had all their remaining teeth removed. Analysis revealed the fee-for-service model generated more expected funding than the current capped-fee model, or an average of AUD$458 (USD$356) per patient. Differences in how activity was recorded resulted in 81.7% uncaptured funding between the two models. This study shows that fee-for-service models capture activity more accurately. However, this model is not used in public hospitals despite it being standard practice in stand-alone public dental clinics. As a result, hospital-based dental clinics appear to be unproductive. Further research can include developing a model that better captures both the activity undertaken as well as patient complexity.","PeriodicalId":44943,"journal":{"name":"World Medical & Health Policy","volume":"102 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Medical & Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wmh3.595","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The availability of hospital-based dental services across Australia varies with a number of hospitals disestablishing dental departments due to rising costs. However, the perceived costs are difficult to quantify as funding models used to capture activity are not uniform across health facilities. To investigate this the predicted funding generated using current models of activity-based funding in the provision of specialist dentistry in Australian public hospitals was examined. Using data from Fiona Stanley Hospital regarding the dental treatment for head and neck cancer patients as part of their work-up for cancer management, expected funding was estimated using the existing fee-for-service and capped-fee models currently in use. Funding estimates were based on the Department of Veterans' Affairs Fee Schedule of Dental Services and the Independent Hospital Pricing Authority's Australian Non-Admitted Care Classification. A total of 127 patients received dental treatment over 209 appointments including 17 patients who had all their remaining teeth removed. Analysis revealed the fee-for-service model generated more expected funding than the current capped-fee model, or an average of AUD$458 (USD$356) per patient. Differences in how activity was recorded resulted in 81.7% uncaptured funding between the two models. This study shows that fee-for-service models capture activity more accurately. However, this model is not used in public hospitals despite it being standard practice in stand-alone public dental clinics. As a result, hospital-based dental clinics appear to be unproductive. Further research can include developing a model that better captures both the activity undertaken as well as patient complexity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公共资金的不平等:澳大利亚以医院为基础的牙科服务资助模式是否合理?
澳大利亚各地医院提供的牙科服务不尽相同,一些医院因成本上升而撤销了牙科部门。然而,由于各医疗机构用于获取活动的资金模式并不统一,因此很难量化这些成本。为了解决这个问题,我们研究了澳大利亚公立医院牙科专科的现行活动资助模式所产生的预测资金。利用菲奥娜-斯坦利医院(Fiona Stanley Hospital)提供的有关头颈部癌症患者牙科治疗的数据,并将其作为癌症治疗工作的一部分,采用目前使用的收费服务和上限收费模式对预期资金进行了估算。资金估算的依据是退伍军人事务部牙科服务收费表和独立医院定价局的澳大利亚非住院护理分类。共有 127 名患者在 209 次预约中接受了牙科治疗,其中 17 名患者的剩余牙齿全部被拔除。分析表明,收费服务模式比目前的上限收费模式产生了更多的预期资金,即平均每位患者 458 澳元(356 美元)。活动记录方式的不同导致两种模式之间有 81.7% 的资金未被获取。这项研究表明,收费服务模式能更准确地记录活动。然而,尽管这种模式是独立公立牙科诊所的标准做法,但并没有在公立医院中使用。因此,以医院为基础的牙科诊所似乎并不具有生产力。进一步的研究可以包括开发一种能更好地捕捉所开展的活动以及患者复杂性的模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Medical & Health Policy
World Medical & Health Policy PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
7.30%
发文量
65
期刊最新文献
Exploring critical factors in referral systems at different health‐care levels Mapping out a direction: India's G20 presidency propels global promotion of traditional medicine Rethinking and advancing the movement of resistance, activism, and advocacy in health in four central arenas of the Middle East Region “Patriarchy permeating health policymaking”: Influence of gender on involvement in health policymaking from nurse leaders' perspective Breast cancer screening and early detection programs in Iran: A health policy analysis and recommendations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1