DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparing National Public Hospital Cost Data Collections for Use in Performance Reporting

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comparing National Public Hospital Cost Data Collections for Use in Performance Reporting WORKING PAPER 118 Comparing National Public Hospital Cost Data Collections for use in Performance Reporting Ms Jenny Watts Lecturer, Health Economics Unit, Monash University Professor Jeff Richardson Director, Health Economics Unit, Monash University Dr Leonie Segal Deputy Director, Health Economics Unit, Monash University CENTRE PROFILE The Centre for Health Program Evaluation (CHPE) is a research and teaching organisation established in 1990 to: · undertake academic and applied research into health programs, health systems and current policy issues; · develop appropriate evaluation methodologies; and · promote the teaching of health economics and health program evaluation, in order to increase the supply of trained specialists and to improve the level of understanding in the health community. The Centre comprises two independent research units, the Health Economics Unit (HEU) which is part of the Faculty of Business and Economics at Monash University, and the Program Evaluation Unit (PEU) which is part of the Department of General Practice and Public Health at The University of Melbourne. The two units undertake their own individual work programs as well as collaborative research and teaching activities. PUBLICATIONS The views expressed in Centre publications are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Centre or its sponsors. Readers of publications are encouraged to contact the author(s) with comments, criticisms and suggestions. A list of the Centre's papers is provided inside the back cover. Further information and copies of the papers may be obtained by contacting: The Co-ordinator Centre for Health Program Evaluation PO Box 477 West Heidelberg Vic 3081, Australia Telephone + 61 3 9496 4433/4434 Facsimile + 61 3 9496 4424 E-mail [email protected] Web Address http://ariel.unimelb.edu.au/chpe/ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was funded by the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care and undertaken by the Health Economics Unit, Monash University. The views expressed in the Report are those of the authors and are not necessarily the views of the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. The Health Economics Unit of the CHPE is supported by Monash University. The Program Evaluation Unit of the CHPE is supported by The University of Melbourne. Both units obtain supplementary funding through national competitive grants and contract research. The research described in this paper is made possible through the support of these bodies. AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many individuals and organisations have contributed to this Report. The authors would also like to thank the following individuals for their input and comments at various stages of the project. · Mr Simon Corden, Productivity Commission · Mr John Goss, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare · Ms Jo Murray, Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care, Casemix Branch · Dr Stuart Peacock and Mr Duncan Mortimer, Health Economics Unit, Monash University · Mr Jim Pearse, New South Wales Health · Mr Kevin Ratcliffe, Hospitals and Ambulance Service Tasmania · Mr Ian Titulaer, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare · Dr Robert Wilson, R. Wilson & Assoc. Officer of Queensland Health are also acknowledged for their valuable comments to the Draft Report. This paper is also available via the Productivity Commission’s website at: http://www.pc.gov.au/service/gsp/external/nphcostdata.pdf Table of Contents Synopsis ........................................................................................................................................... i 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Measuring Hospital Costs .................................................................................................. 1 1.2 The Problem....................................................................................................................... 2 2 Current Measures of Hospital Costs..................................................................................... 2 2.1 Overview of the Two Data Systems................................................................................... 2 2.2 AIHW Methodology ............................................................................................................ 3 Sample ............................................................................................................................... 3 Data Type........................................................................................................................... 4 Methodology/Calculation.................................................................................................... 4 Sample ............................................................................................................................... 7 Data Type........................................................................................................................... 8 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 11 2.4 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Two Models .............................................................. 12 3 Other Issues in Data Consistency....................................................................................... 13 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 13 3.2 Capital/Depreciation......................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Treatment of Private Medical Costs................................................................................. 18 3.4 Labour On-costs/Superannuation.................................................................................... 20 3.5 Cost Modelling and Patient Level Clinical Costing Data ................................................. 20 3.6 Issues in Identifying the Acute Inpatient Population........................................................ 21 3.7 Provision of Costing Data by Small Rural Hospitals........................................................ 22 4 Purpose of Hospital Efficiency and Costing Data ............................................................. 23 5 Summary ................................................................................................................................ 29 6 Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 29 References..................................................................................................................................... 30 List of Tables Table 1 Comparison of average cost per casemix-adjusted separation between AIHW and NHCDC data, by State/territory, for 1997-98 data…………………………. 3 Table 2 Expenditure categories reported by the AIHW, 1997-98………………………………. 4 Table 3 Total separations and hospitals reporting costing data t the NHCDC, 1997-98…..… 8 Table 4 Format for reporting costing data at the DRG level for hospitals using cost modelling…………………………………………………………………………………..… 9 Table 5 Format for reporting costing data at the DRG level for hospitals using patient level clinical costing………………………………………………………………. 10 Table 6 AIHW cost breakdown by state for depreciation and interest, based on aggregate reported expenditure, 1997-98…………………………………………….... 14 Comparing National Public Hospital Cost Data Collections for use in Performance Reporting Table 7 NHCDC cost breakdown by state and cost categories for average cost per DRG showing the proportion of total costs for 1997-98……………………………………… 15 Table 8 NHCDC average total costs for 14 DRGs (ANDRG 3.1) for which depreciation expenditure is greater than $1,000, 1997-98 data for public hospitals……….……... 17 Table 9 Summary of the purposes of hospital costing data, data requirements and the ability of current data collections to meet these objectives…………………………… 25 Comparing National Public Hospital Cost Data Collections for use in Performance Reporting 5 Synopsis Hospital cost data are collected and analysed by two bodies in Australia, the AIHW and the NHCDC. The methodologies employed to identify unit costs differ. The AIHW collection was set up to collect hospital summary statistics (including expenditure) for all public hospitals and essentially uses a ‘top down’ procedure which allocates total expenditures according to defined rules. The NHCDC was established to produce annual updates of national DRG cost weights and associated data. To achieve this the NHCDC uses disaggregated costing data collected from a sample of hospitals to report DRG average costs. This paper first describes these differences in greater detail and identifies weaknesses or problems with each of the methodologies. The adequacy of each database and of the resulting methodology depends upon the questions which each seeks to address. Secondly, therefore, the paper considers the possible uses of the data and concludes with a comparison of the relative advantages of the two databases for addressing a range of issues. Comparing National Public Hospital Cost Data Collections for use in Performance Reporting i Comparing National Public Hospital Cost Data Collections for use in Performance Reporting 1 Introduction 1.1 Measuring Hospital Costs Measures of technical efficiency describe the relationship between costs and outputs, usually
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Acronyms and Terms for Consumer Engagement
    ACRONYMS AND TERMS FOR CONSUMER ENGAGEMENT This table has a list of acronyms and a list of terms for phrases often used in health care. It aims to help people who want to get involved as health consumers or community members. Acronym Phrase What it means ABHR Alcohol Based Hand Rub Alcohol-based hand rubs eliminate micro-organisms from the hands more effectively and cause less irritation than soap and water hand washing. ABI Acquired Brain Injury Damage to the brain through accident or illness ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics Australian Government organisation that collects measurements of our lives in Australia including our health and wellbeing. ABCDEFG Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability, ABCDEFG is the structured approach used when assessing a deteriorating patient. Exposure, Fluids, Glucose ACC Altered Calling Criteria Calling criteria provide early recognition of patients whose medical condition is deteriorating. Standard calling criteria (e.g. a patient’s temperature or respiration rate) are set within a chart called a Standard Observation Chart. Patients’ observations are ideally “Between The Flags”, which is termed the White Zone. Yellow and Red zones indicate observations that are of concern and trigger a facility’s Clinical Emergency Response System. Standard calling criteria can be altered for Yellow or Red Zone observations, based on a patient’s health care requirements. For example, the threshold for the calling criterion for systolic blood pressure may be altered downwards to alert to re-bleeding of a cerebral aneurysm or may be altered upwards to better reflect the patient’s usual observation patterns. Changes must be clearly documented by a medical officer, in consultation with the Attending Medical Officer, on the appropriate Standard Observation Chart.
    [Show full text]
  • Options for a Statewide Health Data Reporting System in Mississippi
    Options for a Statewide Health Data Reporting System in Mississippi Prepared by the National Association of Health Data Organizations for the Center for Mississippi Health Policy November 2007 THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HEALTH DATA ORGANIZATIONS Options for a Statewide Health Data Reporting System in Mississippi Prepared by the National Association of Health Data Organizations for the Center for Mississippi Health Policy November 2007 THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HEALTH DATA ORGANIZATIONS Table of Contents i Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i List of Figures & Tables ................................................................................................................ iii Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ v Summary of Recommendations ............................................................................................... viii Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 The Benefits of a Patient-level Statewide Health Data Reporting System ................................... 12 Public safety and injury surveillance and prevention ............................................................... 12 Public health, disease surveillance and disease registries ........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Admitted Patient Mental Health Related Care
    Admitted patient mental health-related care People with mental health problems may require hospitalisation from time to time. Patients can receive specialised psychiatric care in a psychiatric hospital or in a psychiatric unit within a hospital. Patients can also be admitted to a general ward in a hospital where staff are not specifically trained to care for the mentally ill. Under this circumstance, the admission is classified as without specialised psychiatric care. This section presents information on these non-ambulatory admitted patient mental health-related separations. The data are from the National Hospital Morbidity Database (NHMD), a collation of data on admitted patient care in Australian hospitals. Please note, as it is not possible to determine how many separations an individual patient has had, the information in this section is presented as separation events, not patients. For further information on the data see the data source section. Key points • Of the 222,567 non-ambulatory admitted patient mental health-related separations, specialised psychiatric care was provided for over half (59%) in 2009–10. • Around 31% of mental health-related separations with specialised psychiatric care were from involuntary admissions. • The largest numbers and highest rates of mental health-related separations with specialised psychiatric care were for patients aged 35–44 years. • Depressive episode (F32) and schizophrenia (F20) were the most commonly reported principal diagnoses for separations with specialised psychiatric care (18% and 16% respectively). • Mental health-related separations without specialised psychiatric care were predominantly provided by public acute hospitals (90%). • Mental and behavioural disorders due to use of alcohol (F10) was the most commonly reported principal diagnosis for separations without specialised psychiatric care (20%).
    [Show full text]
  • National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission – June 2009
    A HEALTHIER FUTURE FOR ALL AUSTRALIANS FINAL REPORT JUNE 2009 A Healthier Future For All Australians – Final Report of the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission – June 2009 ISBN: 1-74186-940-4 Publications Number: P3 -5499 © Commonwealth of Australia 2009 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney-General’s Department, Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 or posted at http://www.ag.gov.au/cca 30 June 2009 The Hon Nicola Roxon MP Minister for Health and Ageing Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Dear Minister It is my great pleasure to present the Final Report of the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. A Healthier Future For All Australians: Final Report is the culmination of 16 months of discussion, debate, consultation, research and deliberation by a team dedicated to the cause of strengthening and improving our health system for this and future generations of Australians. We acknowledge the many people who contributed to our work through consultations and submissions – including governments, health professionals and other experts, health and consumer interest groups, and members of the general community. Our Final Report builds on the work of our two earlier reports – Beyond the Blame Game (April 2008) and A Healthier Future For All Australians: Interim Report (December 2008). With the needs and interests of the Australian people at the centre of our thinking, our reform agenda urges action to: Tackle the major access and equity issues that affect people now; Redesign our health system to meet emerging challenges; and Create an agile, responsive and self-improving health system for future generations.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 12 Public Hospitals
    12 Public hospitals CONTENTS 12.1 Profile of public hospitals 12.1 12.2 Framework of performance indicators for public hospitals 12.5 12.3 Key performance indicator results for public hospitals 12.7 12.4 Definitions of key terms 12.34 12.5 References 12.37 Data tables Data tables are identified in references throughout this section by a ‘12A’ prefix (for example, table 12A.1) and are available from the website at https://www.pc.gov.au/research/ ongoing/report-on-government-services. This section reports on the performance of State and Territory public hospitals. Further information on the Report on Government Services including other reported service areas, the glossary and list of abbreviations is available at https://www.pc.gov.au/ research/ongoing/report-on-government-services. 12.1 Profile of public hospitals Public hospitals provide a range of services, including: • acute care services to admitted patients • subacute and non-acute services to admitted patients (for example, rehabilitation, palliative care and long stay maintenance care) • emergency, outpatient and other services to non-admitted patients • mental health services, including services provided to admitted patients by designated psychiatric/psychogeriatric units PUBLIC HOSPITALS 12.1 • public health services • teaching and research activities. This section focuses on services (acute, subacute and non-acute) provided to admitted patients and services provided to non-admitted patients in public hospitals. These services comprise the bulk of public hospital activity. In some instances, data for stand-alone psychiatric hospitals are included in this section. The performance of psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric units of public hospitals is examined more closely in the ‘Mental health management’ section of this Report (section 13).
    [Show full text]
  • Informational Packet on Handoff Work
    Vineet M. Arora Informational Packet on Handoff Work Patient Handoffs 1. Biography 2. Bibliography with electronic links 3. Media Coverage 4. Summary 5. Copies of papers not electronically available For more information, please email us at: [email protected] Contact Information: Vineet Arora, MD, MA Associate Professor, Department of Medicine Assistant Dean Scholarship and Discovery, Pritzker School of Medicine Associate Program Director, Internal Medicine Residency University of Chicago Email: [email protected] Phone: 773-702-8157 Fax: 773-834-2238 Vineet M. Arora, MD, MAPP Informational Packet on Handoff Work Vineet M. Arora Handoff Biography Vineet Arora MD, MAPP is an Associate Program Director for the Internal Medicine Residency and Assistant Dean for Scholarship and Discovery at the Pritzker School of Medicine for the University of Chicago. Dr. Arora’s academic work focuses on resident duty hours, patient handoffs, and quality and safety of hospital care. Her scholarly work has appeared in numerous journals, including Journal of the American Medical Association, Academic Medicine, and the Annals of Internal Medicine, and has been reported by the New York Times, CNN, ABC, and US News & World Report. She has provided testimony to the Institute of Medicine on her work on resident duty hours and handoffs. She has also testified to Congress on the need for physician payment reform to improve medical student interest in primary care. As an academic hospitalist, Dr. Arora supervises internal medicine residents and students caring for hospitalized patients. Dr. Arora is a nationally recognized expert on handoffs in healthcare. She is the Principal Investigator of an Agency for Healthcare Research Quality (AHRQ)-funded grant to evaluate handoff quality among hospitalists and residents.
    [Show full text]
  • At U.S. Ground Zero for Coronavirus, a Hospital Is Transformed
    May 2020 COVID-19 COVID-19 IN THE LITERATURE Volume 24 No. 5 Framework provided Michigan hospitalists Hotspotting does not p6 for a PUI unit p11 get ICU skills p18 reduce readmissions At U.S. Ground Zero for coronavirus, a hospital is transformed By Kari Oakes MDedge News avid Baker, MD, a hospitalist at EvergreenHealth in Kirk- land, Wash., had just come off a 7-day stretch of work Dand was early into his usual 7 days off. He’d helped care for some patients from a nearby assisted living facility who had been admitted with puzzlingly severe vi- ral pneumonia that wasn’t influenza. Though COVID-19, the novel corona- virus that was sickening tens of thou- sands in the Chinese province of Hubei, was in the back of everyone’s mind in late February, he said he wasn’t really expecting the call notifying him that two of the patients with pneumonia had tested positive for COVID-19. Continued on page 8 First row from the bottom: Dr. Maria Lazareva. 2nd row: Dr. James Colquhoun. 3rd row: Dr. Nancy Marshall. 4th row (L): Dr. Johnson Loh. 4th row (R): Dr. Anna Dolgner. 5th row (L): Dr. Ryan Uselman. 5th row (R): Dr. Ronald Huang. ® PHOTO COURTESY EVERGREENHEALTH, KIRKLAND, WASH. the-hospitalist.org PEDIATRICS EDITOR’S DESK Anika Kumar, MD, Weijen Chang, MD, FHM, FAAP SFHM, FAAP Managing infants born to Moving beyond the 500 PERMIT Denville, NJ 07834-3000 NJ Denville, PA HARRISBURG p12 mothers with COVID-19. p26 hospital ward. PAID 3000, Box P.O. POSTAGE U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • What's the Magic Formula for BURNOUT PREVENTION AND
    lifeline DECEMBER 2018 What’s The Magic Formula for BURNOUT PREVENTION AND RECOVERY? Page 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS | 8 10 4 PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE EMPAC SCORES BIG 8 ADVOCACY UPDATE in 2018 ACEP 10 GUEST ARTICLE Council Meeting Recap 2018 16 ANNOUNCEMENTS 17 UPCOMING MEETINGS & DEADLINES GENERAL 18 CAREER OPPORTUNITIES ELECTION California ACEP DECEMBER 2018 Board of Directors & Index of Advertisers Lifeline Editors Roster 2018-19 Board of Directors Independent Emergency Physicians Consortium Page 6 Chi Perlroth, MD, FACEP, President Vivian Reyes, MD, FACEP, President-Elect Vikant Gulati, MD, FACEP, Vice President Sujal Mandavia, MD, FACEP, Treasurer Lori Winston, MD, FACEP, Secretary Mission Hospital Page 18 Aimee Moulin, MD, FACEP, Immediate Past President Harrison Alter, MD, FACEP (At-Large) Reb Close, MD, FACEP John Coburn, MD, FACEP Carrieann Drenten, MD, FACEP Philip Fagan, MD Page 18 Jorge Fernandez, MD Michael Gertz, MD, FACEP Doug Gibson, MD, FACEP John Ludlow, MD, MBA, FACEP Karen Murrell, MD, MBA, FACEP Ventura Emergency Physicians Page 18 Mitesh Patel, MD, MBA, FACHE, CPE Hunter Pattison, MD (CAL/EMRA President) Patrick Um, MD, FACEP, FAAEM Advocacy Fellowship 41st Annual Emergency Medicine In Yosemite Page 15 Carrieann Drenten, MD, FACEP, Advocacy Fellowship Director Sam Jeppsen, MD, Advocacy Fellow Lifeline Medical Editor Richard Obler, MD, FACEP, Medical Editor Lifeline Staff Editors Elena Lopez-Gusman, Executive Director Kelsey McQuaid-Craig, MPA, Director of Policy and Programs Lucia Romo, Membership and Education Coordinator Lauren
    [Show full text]
  • Mental Health Inquiry 2019
    Submission Productivity Commission Mental Health Inquiry 2019 April 2019 ConNetica Team ConNetica Consulting Pty Ltd Directors: Adjunct Professor John Mendoza & Marion Wands We also wish to acknowledge the contributions made (in previous work) and incorporated into this submission by Professor Luis Salvador Carulla (Centre Director, Centre for Mental Health Research, ANU); Asso Professor Lisa Woods (Centre for Social Impact, UWA; and Dr Martin Harris (Strategic Transitions and UTas). ConNetica is a member of the Behavioural Health in ED Community of Practice with the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (Massachusetts), and a partner with ANU’s Centre for Mental Health Research in Psicost Scientific Association Australasia. PO Box 1311 Coolum Beach Qld 4573 P: 07 5491 5456 W: www.connetica.com.au ABN: 76 124 523 815 Table of Contents ABBREVIATIONS....................................................................................................................... IV THIS SUBMISSION ..................................................................................................................... 6 ABOUT CONNETICA .................................................................................................................. 8 1 ASSESSING THE CURRENT AND POTENTIAL INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES............................................................................................... 11 1.1 NATIONAL CONTEXT...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • University of Alberta Emergency Department
    UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT PROCESS FLOW IMPROVEMENT BASED ON EFFICIENT ARCHITECTURAL LAYOUT, LEAN CONCEPT AND POST-LEAN SIMULATION By Basel Abdulaal A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science In Construction Engineering and Management Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering © Basel Abdulaal Spring, 2012 Edmonton, Alberta Permission is hereby granted to the University of Alberta Libraries to reproduce single copies of this thesis and to lend or sell such copies for private, scholarly or scientific research purposes only. Where the thesis is converted to, or otherwise made available in digital form, the University of Alberta will advise potential users of the thesis of these terms. The author reserves all other publication and other rights in association with the copyright in the thesis and, except as herein before provided, neither the thesis nor any substantial portion thereof may be printed or otherwise reproduced any material from whatsoever without the authors’ prior written permission. Abstract Long waiting times in Emergency Departments (ED) have been an issue in Canadian hospitals for years. Many factors have contributed to the excessive waiting time, including the current design scheme which is known architecturally as the “Funnel Design Scheme.” Current architectural and engineering practice lacks standards to quantify the effect of ED design and ancillary departments on waiting time and Length of Stay
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 9 Public Hospitals
    9 Public hospitals Public hospitals are important providers of government funded health services in Australia. This chapter reports on the performance of State and Territory public hospitals, focussing on acute care services. It also reports separately on a significant component of the services provided by public hospitals — maternity services. Public hospital systems are described in section 9.1. A framework of performance indicators for public hospitals is outlined in section 9.2. Section 9.3 contains the key performance indicator results for public hospitals. A profile of maternity services provided by public hospitals is outlined in section 9.4. Section 9.5 presents the performance indicator framework for public hospital maternity services and section 9.6 reports the key performance indicator results for these services. Future directions in reporting are discussed in section 9.7. Terms and definitions are summarised in section 9.8. Section 9.9 lists the supporting tables for this chapter. Section 9.10 lists references used in this chapter. Reporting on public hospitals has been improved this year through the inclusion of three new indicators: • ‘Pre-anaesthetic consultation rates’ are reported as an indicator of the safety aspect of quality. • ‘Patient satisfaction’ and ‘sentinel events’ are reported as indicators of outcomes for public hospitals. 9.1 Profile of public hospitals Definition A key objective of government is to provide public hospital services to ensure the population has access to cost-effective health services, based
    [Show full text]
  • Hospital Mental Health Services in Canada, 2005–2006
    Hospital Mental Health Services in Canada, 2005–2006 Hospital Mental Health Database No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system now known or to be invented, without the prior permission in writing from the owner of the copyright, except by a reviewer who wishes to quote brief passages in connection with a review written for inclusion in a magazine, newspaper or broadcast. Requests for permission should be addressed to: Canadian Institute for Health Information 495 Richmond Road, Suite 600 Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4H6 Phone: 613-241-7860 Fax: 613-241-8120 www.cihi.ca ISBN 978-1-55465-300-3 (PDF) © 2008 Canadian Institute for Health Information How to cite this document: Canadian Institute for Health Information, Hospital Mental Health Services in Canada, 2005–2006 (Ottawa, Ont.: CIHI, 2008). Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre Services de santé mentale en milieu hospitalier au Canada, 2005-2006. ISBN 978-1-55465-301-0 (PDF) Hospital Mental Health Services in Canada, 2005–2006 Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................iii Mental Health Services Indicators, 2005–2006 ..........................................................vii Organization of This Report ................................................................................. viii Methodological Notes...............................................................................................ix
    [Show full text]