改进诊断为基础的成本组在荷兰风险均衡模型:一种新的聚类方法的影响,并允许多病。

IF 1.5 4区 经济学 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE International Journal of Health Economics and Management Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1007/s10754-023-09345-0
Michel Oskam, Richard C van Kleef, René C J A van Vliet
{"title":"改进诊断为基础的成本组在荷兰风险均衡模型:一种新的聚类方法的影响,并允许多病。","authors":"Michel Oskam,&nbsp;Richard C van Kleef,&nbsp;René C J A van Vliet","doi":"10.1007/s10754-023-09345-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health insurance markets with community-rated premiums typically use risk equalization (RE) to compensate insurers for predictable profits on people in good health and predictable losses on those with a chronic disease. Over the past decades RE models have evolved from simple demographic models to sophisticated health-based models. Despite the improvements, however, non-trivial predictable profits and losses remain. This study examines to what extent the Dutch RE model can be further improved by redesigning one key morbidity adjuster: the Diagnosis-based Cost Groups (DCGs). This redesign includes (1) revision of the underlying hospital diagnoses and treatments ('dxgroups'), (2) application of a new clustering procedure, and (3) allowing multi-qualification. We combine data on spending, risk characteristics and hospital claims for all individuals with basic health insurance in the Netherlands in 2017 (N = 17 m) with morbidity data from general practitioners (GPs) for a subsample (N = 1.3 m). We first simulate a baseline RE model (i.e., the RE model of 2020) and then modify three important features of the DCGs. In a second step, we evaluate the effect of the modifications in terms of predictable profits and losses for subgroups of consumers that are potentially vulnerable to risk selection. While less prominent results are found for subgroups derived from the GP data, our results demonstrate substantial reductions in predictable profits and losses at the level of dxgroups and for individuals with multiple dxgroups. An important takeaway from our paper is that smart design of morbidity adjusters in RE can help mitigate selection incentives.</p>","PeriodicalId":44403,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Economics and Management","volume":"23 2","pages":"303-324"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10156830/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving diagnosis-based cost groups in the Dutch risk equalization model: the effects of a new clustering method and allowing for multimorbidity.\",\"authors\":\"Michel Oskam,&nbsp;Richard C van Kleef,&nbsp;René C J A van Vliet\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10754-023-09345-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Health insurance markets with community-rated premiums typically use risk equalization (RE) to compensate insurers for predictable profits on people in good health and predictable losses on those with a chronic disease. Over the past decades RE models have evolved from simple demographic models to sophisticated health-based models. Despite the improvements, however, non-trivial predictable profits and losses remain. This study examines to what extent the Dutch RE model can be further improved by redesigning one key morbidity adjuster: the Diagnosis-based Cost Groups (DCGs). This redesign includes (1) revision of the underlying hospital diagnoses and treatments ('dxgroups'), (2) application of a new clustering procedure, and (3) allowing multi-qualification. We combine data on spending, risk characteristics and hospital claims for all individuals with basic health insurance in the Netherlands in 2017 (N = 17 m) with morbidity data from general practitioners (GPs) for a subsample (N = 1.3 m). We first simulate a baseline RE model (i.e., the RE model of 2020) and then modify three important features of the DCGs. In a second step, we evaluate the effect of the modifications in terms of predictable profits and losses for subgroups of consumers that are potentially vulnerable to risk selection. While less prominent results are found for subgroups derived from the GP data, our results demonstrate substantial reductions in predictable profits and losses at the level of dxgroups and for individuals with multiple dxgroups. An important takeaway from our paper is that smart design of morbidity adjusters in RE can help mitigate selection incentives.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44403,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Health Economics and Management\",\"volume\":\"23 2\",\"pages\":\"303-324\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10156830/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Health Economics and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10754-023-09345-0\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Economics and Management","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10754-023-09345-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

采用社区评级保费的健康保险市场通常使用风险均衡(RE)来补偿保险公司对健康状况良好的人的可预测利润和对慢性疾病患者的可预测损失。在过去的几十年里,RE模型已经从简单的人口模型发展到复杂的基于健康的模型。然而,尽管有了这些改善,但不可忽视的可预测利润和亏损依然存在。本研究通过重新设计一个关键的发病率调整因子:基于诊断的成本组(dcg),检验了荷兰RE模型在多大程度上可以进一步改进。这种重新设计包括(1)修订基础医院诊断和治疗(“dxgroups”),(2)应用新的聚类程序,以及(3)允许多重鉴定。我们将2017年荷兰所有基本医疗保险个人(N = 17 m)的支出、风险特征和医院索赔数据与子样本(N = 1.3 m)的全科医生(gp)的发病率数据结合起来。我们首先模拟基线RE模型(即2020年的RE模型),然后修改DCGs的三个重要特征。在第二步中,我们根据可预测的利润和损失来评估修改对潜在易受风险选择影响的消费者子群体的影响。虽然从GP数据派生的子组中发现的结果不太突出,但我们的结果表明,在dxgroup水平和具有多个dxgroup的个人中,可预测的利润和损失大幅减少。从我们的论文中得出的一个重要结论是,RE中发病率调节器的智能设计可以帮助减轻选择激励。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Improving diagnosis-based cost groups in the Dutch risk equalization model: the effects of a new clustering method and allowing for multimorbidity.

Health insurance markets with community-rated premiums typically use risk equalization (RE) to compensate insurers for predictable profits on people in good health and predictable losses on those with a chronic disease. Over the past decades RE models have evolved from simple demographic models to sophisticated health-based models. Despite the improvements, however, non-trivial predictable profits and losses remain. This study examines to what extent the Dutch RE model can be further improved by redesigning one key morbidity adjuster: the Diagnosis-based Cost Groups (DCGs). This redesign includes (1) revision of the underlying hospital diagnoses and treatments ('dxgroups'), (2) application of a new clustering procedure, and (3) allowing multi-qualification. We combine data on spending, risk characteristics and hospital claims for all individuals with basic health insurance in the Netherlands in 2017 (N = 17 m) with morbidity data from general practitioners (GPs) for a subsample (N = 1.3 m). We first simulate a baseline RE model (i.e., the RE model of 2020) and then modify three important features of the DCGs. In a second step, we evaluate the effect of the modifications in terms of predictable profits and losses for subgroups of consumers that are potentially vulnerable to risk selection. While less prominent results are found for subgroups derived from the GP data, our results demonstrate substantial reductions in predictable profits and losses at the level of dxgroups and for individuals with multiple dxgroups. An important takeaway from our paper is that smart design of morbidity adjusters in RE can help mitigate selection incentives.

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
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: The focus of the International Journal of Health Economics and Management is on health care systems and on the behavior of consumers, patients, and providers of such services. The links among management, public policy, payment, and performance are core topics of the relaunched journal. The demand for health care and its cost remain central concerns. Even as medical innovation allows providers to improve the lives of their patients, questions remain about how to efficiently deliver health care services, how to pay for it, and who should pay for it. These are central questions facing innovators, providers, and payers in the public and private sectors. One key to answering these questions is to understand how people choose among alternative arrangements, either in markets or through the political process. The choices made by healthcare managers concerning the organization and production of that care are also crucial. There is an important connection between the management of a health care system and its economic performance. The primary audience for this journal will be health economists and researchers in health management, along with the larger group of health services researchers. In addition, research and policy analysis reported in the journal should be of interest to health care providers, managers and policymakers, who need to know about the pressures facing insurers and governments, with consequences for regulation and mandates. The editors of the journal encourage submissions that analyze the behavior and interaction of the actors in health care, viz. consumers, providers, insurers, and governments. Preference will be given to contributions that combine theoretical with empirical work, evaluate conflicting findings, present new information, or compare experiences between countries and jurisdictions. In addition to conventional research articles, the journal will include specific subsections for shorter concise research findings and cont ributions to management and policy that provide important descriptive data or arguments about what policies follow from research findings. The composition of the editorial board is designed to cover the range of interest among economics and management researchers.Officially cited as: Int J Health Econ ManagFrom 2001 to 2014 the journal was published as International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics. (Articles published in Vol. 1-14 officially cited as: Int J Health Care Finance Econ)
期刊最新文献
Can health financing programmes reduce food insecurity in a developing country? Estimating price elasticities of demand for pain relief drugs: evidence from Medicare Part D. Internet use, dietary habits and adolescent obesity: evidence from China. The pharmaceutical distributors' efficiency in Italy: an assessment of the impact of the 2010 reimbursable drug pricing reform. Feeling discriminated means poor self-perceived health: a gender analysis using SHARE.
×
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