The effect of funding policy on day of week admissions and discharges in hospitals: the cases of Austria and Canada.

This paper compares two different funding policies for inpatients, the case-based approach in Austria versus the global budgeting approach in Canada. It examines the impact of these funding policies on length of stay of inpatients as one key measure of health outcome. In our study, six major clinical categories for inpatients are selected in which the day of the week for admission is matched to the particular day of the week of discharge for each individual case. The strategic statistical analysis proves that funding policies have a significant impact on the expected length of stay of inpatients. For all six clinical categories, Austrian inpatients stayed longer in hospitals compared to Canadian inpatients. Moreover, inpatients were not admitted and discharged equally throughout the week. We also statistically prove for certain clinical categories that more inpatients are discharged on certain days such as Mondays or Fridays depending on the funding policy. Our study is unique in the literature and our conclusions indicate that, with the right incentives in place, the length of stay can be decreased and discharge anomalies can be eliminated, which ultimately leads to a decrease in healthcare expenditures and an increase in healthcare effectiveness.

[1]  B. Hamilton,et al.  Multiple approaches to assessing the effects of delays for hip fracture patients in the United States and Canada. , 2000, Health services research.

[2]  S. Guterman,et al.  An analysis of hospital productivity and product change. , 2000, Health affairs.

[3]  Marion S. Rauner,et al.  Impact of the new Austrian inpatient payment strategy on hospital behavior: a system-dynamics model , 2002 .

[4]  L. Strömberg,et al.  Prospective payment systems and hip fracture treatment costs. , 1997, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[5]  L. Lamers.  Risk-adjusted capitation payments: developing a diagnostic cost groups classification for the Dutch situation. , 1998, Health policy.

[6]  Harry A. Sultz,et al.  Health Care USA: Understanding Its Organization and Delivery , 1997 .

[7]  Kurt Hornik,et al.  Modelling the effects of the Austrian inpatient reimbursement system on length-of-stay distributions , 2003, OR Spectr..

[8]  D. B. Smith,et al.  Evaluation of the impact of Medicare and Medicaid prospective payment on utilization of Philadelphia area hospitals. , 1986, Health services research.

[9]  D. Ballard,et al.  Trends in Elderly Hospitalization and Readmission Rates for a Geographically Defined Population: Pre‐ and Post‐Prospective Payment , 1991, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[10]  J. Lave,et al.  Effect of the structure of hospital payment on length of stay. , 1990, Health services research.

[11]  F. Sloan,et al.  Utilization of hospital services: the roles of teaching, case mix, and reimbursement. , 1983, Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing.

[12]  A. Mills,et al.  The response of providers to capitation payment: a case-study from Thailand. , 2000, Health policy.

[13]  L. McMahon,et al.  The Integrated Inpatient Management Model: Lessons for Managed Care , 1995, Medical care.

[14]  D. Salkever,et al.  Hospital payment effects on acute inpatient care for mental disorders. , 1985, Archives of general psychiatry.

[15]  T. Hu,et al.  The Hospital Response to Medicare's Prospective Payment System: An Econometric Model of Blue Cross and Blue Shield Plans , 1994, Medical care.

[16]  C Zakoworotny.  Strategies to optimize DRG reimbursement. , 1993, Topics in health care financing.

[17]  J W Thomas,et al.  Is patient length of stay related to quality of care? , 1997, Hospital & health services administration.

[18]  Mårten Lagergren,et al.  What is the role and contribution of models to management and research in the health services? A view from Europe , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[19]  A. Stepan,et al.  Ein hierarchisches Informationssystem zur Analyse von Anreizwirkungen in Spitälern , 2000 .

[20]  B. Gilman,et al.  Hospital response to DRG refinements: the impact of multiple reimbursement incentives on inpatient length of stay. , 2000, Health economics.

[21]  L. Wise,et al.  DRGs, costs, and outcome for plastic surgical patients. , 1988, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[22]  C. Murray,et al.  A framework for assessing the performance of health systems. , 2000, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[23]  Evaluating the New Activity-Based Hospital Financing System in Austria , 2000 .

[24]  P. West.  Market--what market? A review of Health Authority purchasing in the NHS internal market. , 1998, Health policy.

[25]  I. Kristiansen,et al.  [Health care systems in the Nordic countries--more similarities than differences?]. , 2000, Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening : tidsskrift for praktisk medicin, ny raekke.

[26]  R J Lagoe,et al.  Enlisting Physician Support for Practice Guidelines in Hospitals , 1996, Health care management review.

[27]  J. Kronenfeld,et al.  Regulation, retrenchment--the DRG experience: problems from changing reimbursement practice. , 1990, Social science & medicine.

[28]  A. Son.  Modernisation of the system of traditional Korean medicine (1876-1990). , 1998, Health policy.

[29]  M. Mcclellan,et al.  Spending growth rates: are the differences real? , 1999, Health affairs.

[30]  J. Lave,et al.  A comparison of hospital responses to reimbursement policies for Medicaid psychiatric patients. , 1989, The Rand journal of economics.

[31]  C. Laine,et al.  Impact of a DRG-based hospital financing system on quality and outcomes of care in Italy. , 1999, Health services research.

[32]  Milton I. Roemer,et al.  An Introduction to the U.S. Health Care System , 1983 .

[33]  C J Schramm,et al.  Interhospital differences in severity of illness. Problems for prospective payment based on diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). , 1985, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  M. Sommersguter-Reichmann,et al.  Priority setting in Austria. , 1999, Health policy.

[35]  Marion S. Rauner,et al.  EVALUATION OF THE NEW AUSTRIAN INPATIENT REIMBURSEMENT SYSTEM , 1999 .

[36]  M. Mcclellan,et al.  A global analysis of technological change in health care: the case of heart attacks. The TECH Investigators. , 2018, Health affairs.

[37]  K. Lauterbach,et al.  [Applicability of diagnostic related groups (DRG) in an international comparison]. , 2000, Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen.

[38]  J. Newhouse,et al.  Hospital care for elderly patients with diseases of the circulatory system. A comparison of hospital use in the United States and Canada. , 1989, The New England journal of medicine.

[39]  D. Young,et al.  The costs of disease. , 2000, Clinical chemistry.

[40]  Paul J. Feldstein,et al.  Health Care Economics , 2017 .

[41]  T. Mcguire,et al.  Hospital response to prospective payment: moral hazard, selection, and practice-style effects. , 1996, Journal of health economics.

[42]  Robert B. Fetter,et al.  Diagnosis Related Groups: Understanding Hospital Performance , 1991 .

[43]  Howard Glennerster,et al.  Fixing health budgets: experience from Europe and North America , 1997 .

[44]  C M Ashton,et al.  Impact of an all-inclusive diagnosis-related group payment system on inpatient utilization. , 1998, Medical care.

[45]  Luc Delesie,et al.  Bridging the gap between clinicians and health managers , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[46]  M. Sommersguter-Reichmann.  The impact of the Austrian hospital financing reform on hospital productivity: empirical evidence on efficiency and technology changes using a non-parametric input-based Malmquist approach , 2000, Health care management science.

[47]  D. King,et al.  Public opinion and rationing in the United Kingdom. , 1999, Health policy.

[48]  A. Livingston,et al.  If the gut works use it. , 2000, Nursing management.

[49]  G. Anderson,et al.  Health spending, access, and outcomes: trends in industrialized countries. , 1999, Health affairs.