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":"16 1","pages":"123-136"},"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\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"123-136\"},\"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}
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.
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.