PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Risk-adjusted capitation payments: How well do principal inpatient diagnosis-based models work in the German situation? Results from a large data set.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Behrend, C. ; Buchner, F.* ; Happich, M. ; Holle, R. ; Reitmeir, P. ; Wasem, J.*

Risk-adjusted capitation payments: How well do principal inpatient diagnosis-based models work in the German situation? Results from a large data set.

Eur. J. Health Econ. 8, 31-39 (2007)

DOI

PMC

Open Access Green as soon as Postprint is submitted to ZB.

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

Five models of risk adjusters were tested as a (proxy) measure for health status with data from a large German sickness fund. The first two models use standard demographic and socio-demographic variables. One model incorporates a simple binary indicator for hospitalization and the last two are based on the hierarchical coexisting conditions (HCCs: DxCG® Risk Adjustment Software Release 6.1) using in-patient diagnoses. Special investigations were done on the subgroups of insurees who left, joined or stayed with the fund over the observation period. Age and gender grouping accounted for 3.2% of the variation in total expenditure for concurrent as well as prospective models. The current German risk adjusters age, sex, and invalidity status account for 5.1 and 4.5% of the variance in the concurrent and prospective models, respectively. Age, gender, invalidity status and in-patient HCC covariates explain about 37% of the variations of the total expenditures in a concurrent model and roughly 12% of the variations of total expenditures in a prospective model. Only modest improvement can be achieved with the long-term-care (LTC) indicator. For high-risk (cost) groups, substantial under-prediction remains; conversely, for the low-risk group, represented by enrolees who did not show any health care expense in the base year, all of the models over-predict expenditure. Special investigations were done on the subgroups of insurees who left, joined or stayed with the fund over the observation period.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Scopus
Cited By

Altmetric

0.200

0.000