Evaluation of the inclusive payment system based on the diagnosis procedure combination with respect to cataract operations in Japan------A comparison of lengths of hospital stay and medical payments among hospitals

Kazumitsu Nawata, Masako Ii, Hinako Toyama, Tai Takahashi
DOI: 10.4236/health.2009.12016                

Abstract

Following the recommendations of a report submitted by the Central Social Insurance Medical Council concerning the 2002 revision of the Medical Service Fee Schedule, a new inclu-sive payment system, which is based on the Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) sys-tem, was introduced in 82 special functioning hospitals in Japan, effective beginning in April 2003. Since April 2004, the system has been gradually extended to general hospitals that satisfy certain prerequisites. In this paper, the new inclusive payment system is analyzed. Data pertaining to 1,225 patients, who were hospital-ized for cataract diseases and underwent lens operations from July 2004 to September 2005, are used. The lengths of hospital stay and medical payments among hospitals are com-pared. Even after eliminating the influence of patient characteristics, there are large differ-ences among hospitals in average lengths of hospital stay and DPC-based inclusive pay-ments. The highest average inclusive payment is 3.5 times as high as the lowest payment. On the other hand, there are relatively small differ-ences in non-inclusive payments based on the conventional fee-for-service system—the larg-est deviation from the average of all hospitals is approximately 10%. Thus, although payments based on the DPC account for only one-third of the total medical payments for this disease, the major differences in medical payments among hospitals are caused by differences in their DPC-based inclusive payments. The results of the study strongly suggest that revisions of the payment system in Japan are necessary for the efficient use of medical resources in the future.

Keywords

DPC; Inclusive Payment System; Cataract; Lens Operation; Length of Hospital Stay

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	OECD, (2007) Health Data 2007: A Comparative Analy-sis of 30 Countries.
[2]	Okamura, S., Kobayashi, R. and Sakai, T. (2005) Case- mix payment in Japanese medicare, Health Policy, 74, 282-285.
[3]	Yasunaga, H., Ide, Y. H. Imamura, T., et al. (2005) Im-pact of the Japanese diagnosis procedure combination- based system on the cardiovascular medicine-related costs, International Heart Journal, 46, 855-866.
[4]	Frank, R. G. and Lave, J. R. (1986) Per Case Prospective Payment for Psychiatric Inpatients: An Assessment and Alternatives, Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 11, 83-96.
[5]	Newhouse, J. and Byrne, D. (1988) Did medicare’s pro-spective payment system cause length of stay to fall? Journal of Health Economics, 7, 413–416.
[6]	Rogers, W. H., Draper, D., Khan, K. L., et al. (1990) Quality of care before and after implementation of the DRG-based prospective payment system, Journal of the American Medical Association, 264, 1989-1994.
[7]	Kahn, K. L., Rusbenstein, L. Draper, V., D., et al. (1990) The effects of the DRG-based prospective payment sys-tem on the quality of care for hospitalized medical pa-tients, Journal of the American Medical Association, 264, 1953-1955.
[8]	Dillard, G. E. P., J. F., and Smith, H. L. (1999) “The ef-fect of the prospective payment system on rural health care, Accounting Form, 23 (4), 327-358.
[9]	Newhouse, J. (1996) Reimbursing health plans and health providers: Efficiency in production versus selec-tion, Journal of Economic Literature, 34, 1236–1263.
[10]	Preston, A. M., Chua, W., and Neu, D., (1997) The diag-nosis-related group – prospective payment system and the problem of the government of rational health care to the elderly, Accounting, Organization and Society, 22, 147-164.
[11]	Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, (2008) Patient Survey 2006.
[12]	Fedorowicz, Z., Lawrence, D. J., and Guttie, P. (2006) A cochrane systematic review finds no significant differ-ence in outcome or risk of postoperative complications between day care and in-patient cataract surgery, Saudi Medical Journal, 27, 1296-1301.
[13]	Nawata, K., Niita, A., Watanabe, S., and Kawabuchi, K. (2006) An analysis of the length of stay and the effec-tiveness of treatment for hip fractured patients in japan: evaluation of the revision of the 2002 medical service fee schedule, Journal of Health Economics, 25, 722-739.
[14]	Box, G. E. P. and Cox, D. R. (1964) An analysis of trans-formation, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B, 26, 211-252.
[15]	Ellis, R. and McGuire, T. (1996) Hospital response to prospective payment: Moral hazard, selection, and prac-tice-style effects Journal of Health Economics, 15, 257–277.
[16]	Vissers, J. M. H., Van Der Bij, J. D., and Kusters, R. J. (2001) Toward decision support for the waiting lists: An operations management view, Health Care Management Science, 4, 133-142.
[17]	Ghodeswar, B. M. and Vaidyanathan, J. (2006) Adoption of medical technology by hospitals: A review of innova-tion attributes and a conceptual model of the resulting service, World Review of Science, Technology and Sus-tainable Development, 3, 362-380.