Paying for hospital care: the experience with implementing activity-based funding in five European countries

Abstract

: Following the US experience, activity-based funding has become the most common mechanism for reimbursing hospitals in Europe. Focusing on five European countries (England, Finland, France, Germany and Ireland), this paper reviews the motivation for introducing activity-based funding, together with the empirical evidence available to assess the impact of implementation. Despite differences in the prevailing approaches to reimbursement, the five countries shared several common objectives, albeit with different emphasis, in moving to activity-based funding during the 1990s and 2000s. These include increasing efficiency, improving quality of care and enhancing transparency. There is substantial cross-country variation in how activity-based funding has been implemented and developed. In Finland and Ireland, for instance, activity-based funding is principally used to determine hospital budgets, whereas the models adopted in the other three countries are more similar to the US approach. Assessing the impact of activity-based funding is complicated by a shortage of rigorous empirical evaluations. What evidence is currently available, though, suggests that the introduction of activity-based funding has been associated with an increase in activity, a decline in length of stay and/or a reduction in the rate of growth in hospital expenditure in most of the countries under consideration.

When does marketisation lead to privatisation? Profit-making in English health services after the 2012 Health and Social Care Act

“…This squeeze of prices for contracted work is facilitated by activity-based funding in which prices are fixed in a top-down manner in England using data from NHS providers (and not from private providers [O'Reilly et al, 2012]). There is evidence that the privatisation of GP services by New Labour was limited due to such a top-down price squeeze by commissioners which resulted in firms "finding it difficult to make a profit" (Allen and Jones, 2011, 23).…”

Cost Accounting as a Possible Solution for Financial Sustainability of Croatian Public Hospitals

“…It is also necessary to mention Australia and Canada, which are considered to be the most developed countries in the usage of the accrual accounting basis not only for financial reporting but also for budgeting purposes at all levels of government (Mehrolhassani and Emami, 2013 have introduced the DRG methodology at the sectoral level for paying public health services provided by public hospitals (Polyzos et al, 2013;Christensen, Laegreid and Stigen, 2004;Pettersen, 2001;Helmig and Lapsley, 2001;SanchezMartinez et al, 2006). But in some countries like Ireland, Germany, France, Finland and UK, it was also introduced at the institutional level (O'Reilly et al, 2012). Moreover, it is important to emphasize that Bosnia and Herzegovina implemented the accrual accounting basis in public hospitals in 1998, and Slovenia did the same in 2001.…”

An economic analysis of money follows the patient

“…Since 1993 with the introduction of the 'National Casemix Programme' there has been modest progress towards ABF through the introduction of diagnostic related groups (DRGs) in the largest Irish hospitals [5,6]. Over time the number of DRGs employed has increased and its application has broadened to include inpatient and day case activity.…”

“…In addition, there has been an increase in both the number of hospitals involved in the programme and in the proportion of funding received through the programme by hospitals (15% in 2000 to 80% by 2011 [7]). Consequently, by 2011 80% of hospitals' inpatient funding was based on the national average costs of its case-mix adjusted peer group, rather than its own costs [5]. However peer-groups are large which dilutes case-mix adjustments to the extent that hospital budgets are still predominantly generated by historic cost on a prospective basis [8].…”