The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care
-
The literature on innovation in hospitals is relatively extensive and varied. The purpose of this article is to conduct a critical survey, and in particular to highlight the functional and occupational bias that characterises it, whereby the sole object of innovation is medical care, and that innovation is essentially the work of doctors. ⋯ In the latter approach, hospitals are regarded as combinative providers of diverse and dynamic services, able to go beyond their own institutional boundaries by becoming part of larger networks of healthcare provision, which are themselves diverse and dynamic. This approach makes it possible to extend the model of hospital innovation to incorporate new forms of innovation and new actors in the innovation process, in accordance with the Schumpeterian tradition of openness.
-
Comparative Study
Patient access to pharmaceuticals: an international comparison.
We have identified eight sub-dimensions of patient access to pharmaceuticals: marketing approvals, time of marketing approval, coverage, cost sharing, conditions of reimbursement, speed from marketing approval to reimbursement, extent to which beneficiaries control choice of their drug benefit, and evenness of the availability of drugs to the population. For a sample of commonly used best-selling drugs in the United States (US), we measured these eight access sub-dimensions across four health systems: France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (UK), and the US. Although the US approved between 15 and 18% more drugs than the other three countries, the US was slower than France and the UK to approve drugs licensed in all four countries. ⋯ The US is the most flexible in terms of the extent to which beneficiaries control their choice of drug benefit but it is the least universal in terms of evenness of the availability of drugs to the population. Our study confirms the frequently cited problems of access in European countries: lag between marketing approval and reimbursement, and inflexibility in respect of the extent to which beneficiaries control their choice of drug benefit. At the same time, our study confirms, qualitatively, different kinds of access problems in the US: relatively high patient cost sharing for pharmaceuticals, and wide variation in coverage.
-
We developed a decision-analytic model to examine the economic impact of shifting the locus of care for patients with painful neuropathies from specialists to GPs. The impetus for such a shift was assumed to be a formal education program, focusing on the recognition and treatment of neuropathic pain, conducted for GPs. In the model, all patients with neuropathic pain were assumed to initiate care with their GPs and then be referred to specialists and, ultimately, pain clinics as required for adequate pain control. ⋯ This change would result in estimated savings to the Norwegian health-care system in 2004 of 74.1 million NOK (approx. US $11.9 million). A partial shift in the locus of care of painful neuropathies from specialists to GPs may result in substantial cost savings to the Norwegian health-care system.
-
Using data for 2003, we find that both for non-emergency orthopaedic care (38%) and neurosurgery (54%) numerous Dutch patients did not visit the nearest hospital. Our estimation results show that extra travel time negatively influences the probability of hospital bypassing. Good waiting time performance by the nearest hospital also significantly decreases the likelihood of a bypass decision. ⋯ In both samples, patients are more likely to bypass the nearest hospital when it is a university medical centre or a tertiary teaching hospital. Patient attributes, such as age and social status, are also found to significantly affect hospital bypassing. From our analysis it follows that both patient and hospital care heterogeneity should be taken into account when assessing the substitutability of hospitals.