4.7 Article

Cream skimming and hospital transfers in a mixed public-private system

期刊

SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE
卷 132, 期 -, 页码 156-164

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.03.035

关键词

Australia; Hospital transfers; Cream skimming; Hospital utilisation; Mixed public-private system

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [LP0455325]
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council [567217]
  3. Australian Research Council [LP0455325] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The increasing prominence of the private sector in health care provision has generated considerable interest in understanding its implications on quality and cost. This paper investigates the phenomenon of cream skimming in a mixed public-private hospital setting using the novel approach of analysing hospital transfers. We analyse hospital administrative data of patients with ischemic heart disease from the state of Victoria, Australia. The data set contains approximately 1.77 million admission episodes in 309 hospitals, of which 132 are public hospitals, and 177 private hospitals. We ask if patients transferred between public and private hospitals differ systematically in the severity and complexity of their medical conditions; and if so, whether utilisation also differs. We find that patients with higher disease severity are more likely to be transferred from private to public hospitals whereas the opposite is true for patients transferred to private hospitals. We also find that patients transferred from private to public hospitals stayed longer and cost more than private-to-private transfer patients, after controlling for patients' observed health conditions and personal characteristics. Overall, the evidence is suggestive of the presence of cream skimming in the Victorian hospital system, although we cannot conclusively rule out other mechanisms that might influence hospital transfers. (c) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据