IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Has the DRG System Influenced the Efficiency of Diagnostic Technology in Portugal?


  • Vania Sena
  • Clara Dismuke


The use of Diagnostic Related Groups (DRG) as a mechanism for hospital financing is a currently debated topic in Portugal. The DRG system was scheduled to be initiated by the Health Ministry of Portugal on January 1, 1990 as an instrument for the allocation of public hospital budgets funded by the National Health Service (NHS), and as a method of payment for other third party payers (ex. Public Employees (ADSE), private insurers, etc.). Based on experience from other countries such as the United States, it was expected that implementation of this system would result in more efficient hospital resource utilisation and a more equitable distribution of hospital budgets. However, in order to minimise the potentially adverse financial impact on hospitals, the Portuguese Health Ministry decided to gradually phase in the use of the DRG system for budget allocation by using blended hospital-specific and national DRG case-mix rates. Since implementation in 1990, the percentage of each hospital's budget based on hospital specific costs was to decrease, while the percentage based on DRG case-mix was to increase. This was scheduled to continue until 1995 when the plan called for allocating yearly budgets on a 50% national and 50% hospital-specific cost basis. While all other non- NHS third party payers are currently paying based on DRGs, the adoption of DRG case-mix as a National Health Service budget setting tool has been slower than anticipated. There is now some argument in both the political and academic communities as to the appropriateness of DRGs as a budget setting criterion as well as to their impact on hospital efficiency in Portugal. This paper uses a two-stage procedure to assess the impact of actual DRG payment on the productivity (through its components, i.e. technological change and technical efficiency change) of diagnostic technology in Portuguese hospitals during the years 1992-1994, using both parametric and non-parametric frontier models. We find evidence that the DRG payment system does appear to have had a positive impact on productivity and technical efficiency of some commonly employed diagnostic technologies in Portugal during this time span.

Suggested Citation

  • Vania Sena & Clara Dismuke, "undated". "Has the DRG System Influenced the Efficiency of Diagnostic Technology in Portugal?," Discussion Papers 98/6, Department of Economics, University of York.
  • Handle: RePEc:yor:yorken:98/6

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Zuckerman, Stephen & Hadley, Jack & Iezzoni, Lisa, 1994. "Measuring hospital efficiency with frontier cost functions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 255-280, October.
    2. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    3. Vitaliano, Donald F. & Toren, Mark, 1994. "Cost and efficiency in nursing homes: a stochastic frontier approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 281-300, October.
    4. Ellis, Randall P. & McGuire, Thomas G., 1996. "Hospital response to prospective payment: Moral hazard, selection, and practice-style effects," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 257-277, June.
    5. Hodgkin, Dominic & McGuire, Thomas G., 1994. "Payment levels and hospital response to prospective payment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-29, March.
    6. Newhouse, Joseph P., 1994. "Frontier estimation: How useful a tool for health economics?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 317-322, October.
    7. Kooreman, Peter, 1994. "Nursing home care in The Netherlands: a nonparametric efficiency analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 301-316, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:yor:yorken:98/6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Paul Hodgson). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.