Strategic Coding in the Assessment of Long-Term Care Needs: Evidence From France

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 ECONOMICS Health economics Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1002/hec.4950
Delphine Roy
{"title":"Strategic Coding in the Assessment of Long-Term Care Needs: Evidence From France","authors":"Delphine Roy","doi":"10.1002/hec.4950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>There is strong evidence of “upcoding” whereby health care providers overstate the severity of disease to increase billing revenue. Much less is known about strategic coding in the assessment of patient eligibility for long-term care. This paper takes advantage of a unique French linked survey dataset to document how patient assessment depends critically on the incentives of the assessing agents. I find that nursing homes assess their patients to be more disabled (thus increasing their revenue) compared to community assessors who seek to minimize disability payments levels. Public hospital-owned long-term care facilities are more likely to overrate disability levels; there is also evidence that cognitively impaired or socially disadvantaged patients exhibit more disability upcoding. In the context of nursing homes, upcoding might be read as “side-coding,” driven by flaws in the assessment tool that does not allow the care provider to adequately fund the time they spend on these patients. Conversely, assessors of patients living in the community could downcode disability to shift some of the care tasks to informal caregivers.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":"34 6","pages":"1035-1063"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.4950","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is strong evidence of “upcoding” whereby health care providers overstate the severity of disease to increase billing revenue. Much less is known about strategic coding in the assessment of patient eligibility for long-term care. This paper takes advantage of a unique French linked survey dataset to document how patient assessment depends critically on the incentives of the assessing agents. I find that nursing homes assess their patients to be more disabled (thus increasing their revenue) compared to community assessors who seek to minimize disability payments levels. Public hospital-owned long-term care facilities are more likely to overrate disability levels; there is also evidence that cognitively impaired or socially disadvantaged patients exhibit more disability upcoding. In the context of nursing homes, upcoding might be read as “side-coding,” driven by flaws in the assessment tool that does not allow the care provider to adequately fund the time they spend on these patients. Conversely, assessors of patients living in the community could downcode disability to shift some of the care tasks to informal caregivers.

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
长期护理需求评估中的策略编码:来自法国的证据。
有强有力的证据表明,医疗保健提供者夸大疾病的严重程度,以增加计费收入。在评估患者是否有资格接受长期护理方面,人们对战略编码知之甚少。本文利用独特的法国关联调查数据集来记录患者评估如何严重依赖于评估代理的激励。我发现,与社区评估人员相比,疗养院评估他们的病人更残疾(从而增加他们的收入),社区评估人员试图将残疾支付水平降至最低。公立医院拥有的长期护理设施更有可能高估残疾水平;也有证据表明,认知障碍或社会弱势患者表现出更多的残疾升级。在养老院的背景下,“上编码”可能被解读为“侧编码”,由评估工具的缺陷驱动,这些缺陷不允许护理提供者为他们花在这些病人身上的时间提供足够的资金。相反,生活在社区的患者的评估人员可以降低残疾的重要性,将一些护理任务转移给非正式的护理人员。
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
Health economics
Health economics 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
177
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems. Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses. Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.
期刊最新文献
Effect of Austerity Measures on Infant Mortality: Evidence From Greece. Kids Give You Headaches? Universal Prekindergarten and Maternal Prescriptions for Pain-Relief and Hormone Medications. How do US Adults Who Vape Choose Among Different E-Cigarette (EC) Models and Cigarettes in Response to Prices and Taxes. Long-Term Care Insurance and Catastrophic Health Spending at the End of Life Among Older Adults: Evidence From China. Pharmaceutical Pricing and R&D as a Global Public Good.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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