IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0188612.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Medical costs, Cesarean delivery rates, and length of stay in specialty hospitals vs. non-specialty hospitals in South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Seung Ju Kim
  • Sun Jung Kim
  • Kyu-Tae Han
  • Eun-Cheol Park

Abstract

Background: Since 2011, specialty hospitals in South Korea have been known for providing high- quality care in specific clinical areas. Much research related to specialty hospitals and their performance in many such areas has been performed, but investigations about their performance in obstetrics and gynecology are lacking. Thus, we aimed to compare specialty vs. non-specialty hospitals with respect to mode of obstetric delivery, especially the costs and length of stay related to Cesarean section (CS) procedures, and to provide evidence to policy-makers for evaluating the success of hospitals that specialize in obstetric and gynecological (OBGYN) care. Methods: We obtained National Health Insurance claim data from 2012 to 2014, which included information from 418,141 OBGYN cases at 214 hospitals. We used a generalized estimating equation model to identify a potential association between the likelihood of CS at specialty hospitals compared with other hospitals. We also evaluated medical costs and length of stay in specialty hospitals according to type of delivery. Results: We found that 150,256 (35.9%) total deliveries were performed by CS. The odds ratio of CS was significantly lower in specialty hospitals (OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.93–0.96compared to other hospitals Medical costs (0.74%) and length of stay (1%) in CS cases increased in specialty hospitals, although length of stay following vaginal delivery was lower (0.57%) in specialty hospitals compared with other hospitals. Conclusions: We determined that specialty hospitals are significantly associated with a lower likelihood of CS delivery and shorter length of stay after vaginal delivery. Although they are also associated with higher costs for delivery, the increased cost could be due to the high level of intensive care provided, which leads to improve quality of care. Policy-makers should consider incentive programs to maintain performance of specialty hospitals and promote efficiency that could reduce medical costs accrued by patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Seung Ju Kim & Sun Jung Kim & Kyu-Tae Han & Eun-Cheol Park, 2017. "Medical costs, Cesarean delivery rates, and length of stay in specialty hospitals vs. non-specialty hospitals in South Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-11, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0188612
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188612
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0188612
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0188612&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0188612?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Propper, Carol & Burgess, Simon & Green, Katherine, 2004. "Does competition between hospitals improve the quality of care?: Hospital death rates and the NHS internal market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1247-1272, July.
    2. Anirban Basu & Willard G. Manning & John Mullahy, 2004. "Comparing alternative models: log vs Cox proportional hazard?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(8), pages 749-765, August.
    3. Nazmi Sari, 2002. "Do competition and managed care improve quality?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(7), pages 571-584, October.
    4. Grant, Darren, 2009. "Physician financial incentives and cesarean delivery: New conclusions from the healthcare cost and utilization project," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 244-250, January.
    5. Kim, Sun Jung & Park, Eun-Cheol & Jang, Sung In & Lee, Minjee & Kim, Tae Hyun, 2013. "An analysis of the inpatient charge and length of stay for patients with joint diseases in Korea: Specialty versus small general hospitals," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 93-99.
    6. Amal Malehi & Fatemeh Pourmotahari & Kambiz Angali, 2015. "Statistical models for the analysis of skewed healthcare cost data: a simulation study," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Gruber, Jon & Kim, John & Mayzlin, Dina, 1999. "Physician fees and procedure intensity: the case of cesarean delivery," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 473-490, August.
    8. Barro, Jason R. & Huckman, Robert S. & Kessler, Daniel P., 2006. "The effects of cardiac specialty hospitals on the cost and quality of medical care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 702-721, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abe Dunn & Adam Hale Shapiro, 2018. "Physician Competition and the Provision of Care: Evidence from Heart Attacks," American Journal of Health Economics, MIT Press, vol. 4(2), pages 226-261, Spring.
    2. Gaynor, Martin & Town, Robert J., 2011. "Competition in Health Care Markets," Handbook of Health Economics, in: Mark V. Pauly & Thomas G. Mcguire & Pedro P. Barros (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 499-637, Elsevier.
    3. Pan, Jay & Qin, Xuezheng & Li, Qian & Messina, Joseph P. & Delamater, Paul L., 2015. "Does hospital competition improve health care delivery in China?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 179-199.
    4. R. R. Croes & Y. J. F. M. Krabbe-Alkemade & M. C. Mikkers, 2018. "Competition and quality indicators in the health care sector: empirical evidence from the Dutch hospital sector," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(1), pages 5-19, January.
    5. Anne-Fleur Roos & Eddy van Doorslaer & Owen O'Donnell & Erik Schut & Marco Varkevisser, 2018. "Does price competition damage healthcare quality?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 18-040/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Chen, Chi-Chen & Cheng, Shou-Hsia, 2010. "Hospital competition and patient-perceived quality of care: Evidence from a single-payer system in Taiwan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 65-73, November.
    7. Guccio, C. & Lisi, D., 2014. "Social interactions in inappropriate behavior for childbirth services: Theory and evidence from the Italian hospital sector," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 14/28, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    8. Martin Gaynor, "undated". "What Do We Know About Competition and Quality in Health Care Markets?," GSIA Working Papers 2006-E62, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    9. Diane Alexander, 2017. "How do Doctors Respond to Incentives? Unintended Consequences of Paying Doctors to Reduce Costs," Working Paper Series WP-2017-9, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    10. Jones, A.M, 2010. "Models For Health Care," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 10/01, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    11. Daniel Burkhard & Christian P. R. Schmid & Kaspar Wüthrich, 2019. "Financial incentives and physician prescription behavior: Evidence from dispensing regulations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(9), pages 1114-1129, September.
    12. Thomas Buchmueller & John C. Ham & Lara D. Shore-Sheppard, 2015. "The Medicaid Program," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 1, pages 21-136, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. repec:pri:cheawb:alexander_d_jul13 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Li‐Lin Liang, 2015. "Do Diagnosis‐Related Group‐Based Payments Incentivise Hospitals to Adjust Output Mix?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 454-469, April.
    15. Graham Cookson & Ioannis Laliotis, 2018. "Promoting normal birth and reducing caesarean section rates: An evaluation of the Rapid Improvement Programme," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 675-689, April.
    16. Brekke, Kurt R. & Siciliani, Luigi & Straume, Odd Rune, 2010. "Price and quality in spatial competition," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 471-480, November.
    17. Kim, Seung Ju & Han, Kyu-Tae & Kim, Sun Jung & Park, Eun-Cheol & Park, Hye Ki, 2016. "Impact of a diagnosis-related group payment system on cesarean section in Korea," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(6), pages 596-603.
    18. Martin Gaynor & Rodrigo Moreno-Serra & Carol Propper, 2013. "Death by Market Power: Reform, Competition, and Patient Outcomes in the National Health Service," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 134-166, November.
    19. Cooper, Zack & Gibbons, Stephen & Skellern, Matthew, 2018. "Does competition from private surgical centres improve public hospitals' performance? Evidence from the English National Health Service," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 63-80.
    20. Carol Propper & Simon Burgess & Denise Gossage, 2008. "Competition and Quality: Evidence from the NHS Internal Market 1991-9," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 138-170, January.
    21. Francesco Longo & Luigi Siciliani & Andrew Street, 2019. "Are cost differences between specialist and general hospitals compensated by the prospective payment system?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(1), pages 7-26, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0188612. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.