Do differences in profiling criteria bias performance measurements? Economic profiling of medical clinics under the Korea National Health Insurance program: An observational study using claims data
2011

Economic Profiling of Medical Clinics in Korea

Sample size: 23112 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Kang Hee-Chung, Hong Jae-Seok

Primary Institution: Health Insurance Review & Assessment Institute, Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Hypothesis

Do differences in profiling criteria bias performance measurements in economic profiling of medical clinics under the Korea National Health Insurance program?

Conclusion

The profiling criteria used can significantly affect whether a medical clinic is deemed cost-efficient or not.

Supporting Evidence

  • The exclusion of pharmacy costs lowered agreement between rankings to the lowest level.
  • Differences in case-mix classification also lowered agreement considerably.
  • Standardized profiling criteria are important for the consolidated management of health care costs.

Takeaway

This study shows that how we measure costs in clinics can change whether we think they are doing a good job or not.

Methodology

Data on medical care benefit costs for outpatient care were collected from the NHI claims database, and eight types of cost-efficiency indices were calculated and compared.

Potential Biases

Different profiling criteria may lead to contradictory outcomes, affecting the reliability of provider-profiling systems.

Limitations

The time lag between when services are provided and when they are billed could affect the results.

Participant Demographics

The study included 23,112 medical clinics and 22,088,649 patients who visited these clinics.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1472-6963-11-189

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication