将患者激励措施与分段付费相结合。

Q3 Economics, Econometrics and Finance Forum for Health Economics and Policy Pub Date : 2013-01-01 Epub Date: 2013-04-15 DOI:10.1515/fhep-2012-0002
Lorens A Helmchen, William E Encinosa, Michael E Chernew, Richard A Hirth
{"title":"将患者激励措施与分段付费相结合。","authors":"Lorens A Helmchen, William E Encinosa, Michael E Chernew, Richard A Hirth","doi":"10.1515/fhep-2012-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To rein in cost, payers are exploring bundled payment, which aggregates fees for a range of services into a single prospective payment. While under bundled payment providers would have incentives to reduce cost, they might also withhold more expensive care that patients prefer. We explore how bundled payment could be aligned with a benefit design that would encourage patients' consideration of cost without jeopardizing access to the most expensive treatments. Least-costly-alternative approaches allow patient choice but might deter patients from choosing more expensive care by exposing them to potentially large out-of-pocket payments. A novel \"shared-savings supplement\" would reward patients for choosing the least costly alternative with a supplemental cash disbursement and thus allow them to share in any cost savings. This cash incentive for the least-costly-alternative allows a reduction of the out-of-pocket payment for the expensive alternative. Thus, patients would still have the option of the more expensive therapy while facing only a modest out-of-pocket cost. Such benefit modifications could be aligned with bundled payment by splitting the responsibility for the incremental cost of more expensive care between patients and their providers.</p>","PeriodicalId":38039,"journal":{"name":"Forum for Health Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6481942/pdf/nihms-1019059.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integrating Patient Incentives with Episode-Based Payment.\",\"authors\":\"Lorens A Helmchen, William E Encinosa, Michael E Chernew, Richard A Hirth\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/fhep-2012-0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To rein in cost, payers are exploring bundled payment, which aggregates fees for a range of services into a single prospective payment. While under bundled payment providers would have incentives to reduce cost, they might also withhold more expensive care that patients prefer. We explore how bundled payment could be aligned with a benefit design that would encourage patients' consideration of cost without jeopardizing access to the most expensive treatments. Least-costly-alternative approaches allow patient choice but might deter patients from choosing more expensive care by exposing them to potentially large out-of-pocket payments. A novel \\\"shared-savings supplement\\\" would reward patients for choosing the least costly alternative with a supplemental cash disbursement and thus allow them to share in any cost savings. This cash incentive for the least-costly-alternative allows a reduction of the out-of-pocket payment for the expensive alternative. Thus, patients would still have the option of the more expensive therapy while facing only a modest out-of-pocket cost. Such benefit modifications could be aligned with bundled payment by splitting the responsibility for the incremental cost of more expensive care between patients and their providers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forum for Health Economics and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6481942/pdf/nihms-1019059.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forum for Health Economics and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/fhep-2012-0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/4/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Economics, Econometrics and Finance\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forum for Health Economics and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/fhep-2012-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/4/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了控制成本,支付方正在探索捆绑式支付,即将一系列服务的费用汇总到一个单一的预期支付中。虽然在捆绑支付下,医疗服务提供者有动力降低成本,但他们也可能会拒绝提供患者更喜欢的更昂贵的医疗服务。我们探讨了如何将捆绑支付与福利设计相结合,既鼓励患者考虑成本,又不影响患者获得最昂贵的治疗。成本最低的替代方法允许患者选择,但可能会使患者面临潜在的巨额自付费用,从而阻碍他们选择更昂贵的治疗。一种新颖的 "共享节余补充 "方法将对选择成本最低替代方案的患者给予奖励,向他们支付补充现金,从而使他们能够共享所节省的费用。对费用最低替代方案的现金奖励可以减少昂贵替代方案的自付费用。因此,患者仍然可以选择更昂贵的疗法,而只需支付少量的自付费用。通过在患者和医疗服务提供者之间分担更昂贵治疗的增量成本,这种福利调整可以与捆绑式付费相一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Integrating Patient Incentives with Episode-Based Payment.

To rein in cost, payers are exploring bundled payment, which aggregates fees for a range of services into a single prospective payment. While under bundled payment providers would have incentives to reduce cost, they might also withhold more expensive care that patients prefer. We explore how bundled payment could be aligned with a benefit design that would encourage patients' consideration of cost without jeopardizing access to the most expensive treatments. Least-costly-alternative approaches allow patient choice but might deter patients from choosing more expensive care by exposing them to potentially large out-of-pocket payments. A novel "shared-savings supplement" would reward patients for choosing the least costly alternative with a supplemental cash disbursement and thus allow them to share in any cost savings. This cash incentive for the least-costly-alternative allows a reduction of the out-of-pocket payment for the expensive alternative. Thus, patients would still have the option of the more expensive therapy while facing only a modest out-of-pocket cost. Such benefit modifications could be aligned with bundled payment by splitting the responsibility for the incremental cost of more expensive care between patients and their providers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Forum for Health Economics and Policy
Forum for Health Economics and Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: Forum for Health Economics & Policy (FHEP) showcases articles in key substantive areas that lie at the intersection of health economics and health policy. The journal uses an innovative structure of forums to promote discourse on the most pressing and timely subjects in health economics and health policy, such as biomedical research and the economy, and aging and medical care costs. Forums are chosen by the Editorial Board to reflect topics where additional research is needed by economists and where the field is advancing rapidly. The journal is edited by Katherine Baicker, David Cutler and Alan Garber of Harvard University, Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University, Dana Goldman of the University of Southern California and RAND Corporation, Neeraj Sood of the University of Southern California, Anup Malani and Tomas Philipson of University of Chicago, Pinar Karaca Mandic of the University of Minnesota, and John Romley of the University of Southern California. FHEP is sponsored by the Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics at the University of Southern California. A subscription to the journal also includes the proceedings from the National Bureau of Economic Research''s annual Frontiers in Health Policy Research Conference. Topics: Economics, Political economics, Biomedical research and the economy, Aging and medical care costs, Nursing, Cancer studies, Medical treatment, Others related.
期刊最新文献
Optimal Taxation of Cigarettes and E-Cigarettes: Principles for Taxing Reduced-Harm Tobacco Products. Self-Reported Mental Health and the Demand for Mental Health Care After a Labor Market Shock: Evidence from the Spanish Great Recession. California Hospitals' Rapidly Declining Traditional Medicare Operating Margins. Benefits of Adopting by Reference Portions of Clinical Protocols. Frontmatter
×
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