Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38840102›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2024

The impact of an innovative payment method on medical expenditure, efficiency, and quality for inpatients with different types of medical insurance: evidence from a pilot city, China.

Kunhe Lin, Yunfei Li, Yifan Yao, Yingbei Xiong, Li Xiang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kunhe LinDepartment of Health Management, School of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Yunfei LiDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Yifan YaoDepartment of Health Management, School of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Yingbei XiongDepartment of Health Management, School of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Li XiangDepartment of Health Management, School of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. xllyf@hust.edu.cn.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 72174068
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince 2020, China has implemented an innovative payment method called Diagnosis-Intervention Packet (DIP) in 71 cities nationwide. This study aims to assess the impact of DIP on medical expenditure, efficiency, and quality for inpatients covered by the Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance (UEBMI) and Urban and Rural Residents Basic Medical Insurance (URRBMI). It seeks to explore whether there are differences in these effects among inpatients of the two insurance types, thereby further understanding its implications for health equity. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted interrupted time series analyses on outcome variables reflecting medical expenditure, efficiency, and quality for both UEBMI and URRBMI inpatients, based on a dataset comprising 621,125 inpatient reimbursement records spanning from June 2019 to June 2023 in City A. This dataset included 110,656 records for UEBMI inpatients and 510,469 records for URRBMI inpatients.

resultsAfter the reform, the average expenditure per hospital admission for UEBMI inpatients did not significantly differ but continued to follow an upward pattern. In contrast, for URRBMI inpatients, the trend shifted from increasing before the reform to decreasing after the reform, with a decline of 0.5%. The average length of stay for UEBMI showed no significant changes after the reform, whereas there was a noticeable downward trend in the average length of stay for URRBMI. The out-of-pocket expenditure (OOP) per hospital admission, 7-day all-cause readmission rate and 30-day all-cause readmission rate for both UEBMI and URRBMI inpatients showed a downward trend after the reform.

conclusionThe DIP reform implemented different upper limits on budgets based on the type of medical insurance, leading to varying post-treatment prices for UEBMI and URRBMI inpatients within the same DIP group. After the DIP reform, the average expenditure per hospital admission and the average length of stay remained unchanged for UEBMI inpatients, whereas URRBMI inpatients experienced a decrease. This trend has sparked concerns about hospitals potentially favoring UEBMI inpatients. Encouragingly, both UEBMI and URRBMI inpatients have seen positive outcomes in terms of alleviating patient financial burdens and enhancing the quality of care.

Indexed as

Health ExpendituresInpatientsInsurance, HealthChinaFemaleHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisMalePilot ProjectsQuality of Health CareHealth equityInnovative payment methodMedical efficiencyMedical expenditureMedical insuranceMedical quality

Identifiers

PMID38840102
PMCPMC11151554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.