Health system description and assessment: a scoping review of templates for systematic analyses.

BACKGROUND: Understanding and comparing health systems is key for cross-country learning and health system strengthening. Templates help to develop standardised and coherent descriptions and assessments of health systems, which then allow meaningful analyses and comparisons. Our scoping review aims to provide an overview of existing templates, their content and the way data is presented. MAIN BODY: Based on the WHO building blocks framework, we defined templates as having (1) an overall framework, (2) a list of indicators or topics, and (3) instructions for authors, while covering (4) the design of the health system, (5) an assessment of health system performance, and (6) should cover the entire health system. We conducted a scoping review of grey literature published between 2000 and 2023 to identify templates. The content of the identified templates was screened, analyzed and compared. We found 12 documents that met our inclusion criteria. The building block `health financing´ is covered in all 12 templates; and many templates cover ´service delivery´ and ´health workforce'. Health system performance is frequently assessed with regard to 'access and coverage', 'quality and safety', and 'financial protection'. Most templates do not cover 'responsiveness' and 'efficiency'. Seven templates combine quantitative and qualitative data, three are mostly quantitative, and two are primarily qualitative. Templates cover data and information that is mostly relevant for specific groups of countries, e.g. a particular geographical region, or for high or for low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Templates for LMICs rely more on survey-based indicators than administrative data. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first scoping review of templates for standardized descriptions of health systems and assessments of their performance. The implications are that (1) templates can help analyze health systems across countries while accounting for context; (2) template-guided analyses of health systems could underpin national health policies, strategies, and plans; (3) organizations developing templates could learn from approaches of other templates; and (4) more research is needed on how to improve templates to better achieve their goals. Our findings provide an overview and help identify the most important aspects and topics to look at when comparing and analyzing health systems, and how data are commonly presented. The templates were created by organizations with different agendas and target audiences, and with different end products in mind. Comprehensive health systems analyses and comparisons require production of quantitative indicators and complementing them with qualitative information to build a holistic picture. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:   Not applicable.

The Structure and Financing of Health Care Systems Affected How Providers Coped With COVID-19.

Policy Points We compared the structure of health care systems and the financial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care providers in the United States, England, Germany, and Israel: systems incorporating both public and private insurers and providers. The negative financial effects on health care providers have been more severe in the United States than elsewhere, owing to the prevalence of activity-based payment systems, limited direct governmental control over available provider capacity, and the structure of governmental financial relief. In a pandemic, activity-based payment reverses the conventional financial positions of payers and providers and may prevent providers from prioritizing public health because of the desire to avoid revenue loss caused by declines in patient visits.

Israel's response to the COVID-19 pandemic: tailoring measures for vulnerable cultural minority populations.

Every country has vulnerable populations that require special attention from policymakers in their response to a pandemic. This is because those populations may have specific characteristics, culture and behaviours that can accelerate the spread of the virus, and they usually have less access to healthcare, particularly in times of crisis. In order to carry out a comprehensive national intervention plan, policy makers should be sensitive to the needs and lifestyles of these groups, while taking into account structural and cultural gaps.In the context of Israel, the two most prominent and well-defined minority groups are the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community and parts of the Arab population. The government was slow to recognize the unique position of these two groups, public pressure eventually led to a response that was tailored to the ultra-Orthodox community and during the month of Ramadan a similar response has been implemented among the Arab community.

The 2010 expansion of activity-based hospital payment in Israel: an evaluation of effects at the ward level.

BACKGROUND: In 2010, Israel intensified its adoption of Procedure-Related Group (PRG) based hospital payments, a local version of DRG (Diagnosis-related group). PRGs were created for certain procedures by clinical fields such as urology, orthopedics, and ophthalmology. Non-procedural hospitalizations and other specific procedures continued to be paid for as per-diems (PD). Whether this payment reform affected inpatient activities, measured by the number of discharges and average length of stay (ALoS), is unclear. METHODS: We analyzed inpatient data provided by the Ministry of Health from all 29 public hospitals in Israel. Our observations were hospital wards for the years 2008-2015, as proxies to clinical fields. We investigated the impact of this reform at the ward level using difference-in-differences analyses among procedural wards. Those for which PRG codes were created were treatment wards, other procedural wards served as controls. We further refined the analysis of effects on each ward separately. RESULTS: Discharges increased more in the wards that were part of the control group than in the treatment wards as a group. However, a refined analysis of each treated ward separately reveals that discharges increased in some, but decreased in other wards. ALoS decreased more in treatment wards. Difference-in-differences results could not suggest causality between the PRG payment reform and changes in inpatient activity. CONCLUSIONS: Factors that may have hampered the effects of the reform are inadequate pricing of procedures, conflicting incentives created by other co-existing hospital-payment components, such as caps and retrospective subsidies, and the lack of resources to increase productivity. Payment reforms for health providers such as hospitals need to take into consideration the entire provider market, available resources, other - potentially conflicting - payment components, and the various parties involved and their interests.

The Israeli health system's rapid responses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic posed numerous challenges to health systems around the world. In addressing many of those challenges, Israel responded quite rapidly. While quick action is not an end in it itself, it can be important in responding to disease outbreaks. Some of Israel's rapid responses to the pandemic contributed significantly to population health and provided important learning opportunities for other countries. MAIN BODY: Some of the most prominent Israeli rapid responses were related to vaccination. Israel led the world in the pace of its initial vaccine rollout, and it was also the first country to approve and administer booster vaccines to broad segments of the population. In addition, Israeli scholars published a series of timely reports analyzing vaccination impact, which informed policy in Israel and other countries. Israel was a rapid responder in additional areas of public health. These include the partial closure of its borders, the adoption of physical distancing measures, the use of digital surveillance technology for contact tracing, the use of wastewater surveillance to monitor viral spread, and the use of vaccine certificates ("green passes") to facilitate a return to routine in the face of the ongoing pandemic. Many factors contributed to Israel's capacity to repeatedly respond rapidly to a broad array of COVID-19 challenges. These include a national health insurance system that promotes public-private coordination, a system of universal electronic health records, a high level of emergency preparedness, a culture of focusing on goal attainment, a culture of innovation, and the presence of a strong scientific community which is highly connected internationally. In addition, some of the rapid responses (e.g., the rapid initial vaccination rollout) facilitated rapid responses in related areas (e.g., the analysis of vaccination impact, the administration of boosters, and the adoption of green passes). While rapid response can contribute to population health and economic resilience, it can also entail costs, risks, and limitations. These include making decisions and acting before all the relevant information is available; deciding without sufficient consideration of the full range of possible effects, costs, and benefits; not providing enough opportunities for the involvement of relevant groups in the decision-making process; and depleting non-renewable resources. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we encourage leaders in the Israeli government to ensure that its emergency response system will continue to have the capacity to respond rapidly to large-scale challenges, whether of a military or civilian nature. At the same time, the emergency response systems should develop mechanisms to include more stakeholders in the fast-paced decision-making process and should improve communication with the public. In addition, they should put into place mechanisms for timely reconsideration, adjustment, and-when warranted-reversal of decisions which, while reasonable when reached, turn out to have been ill-advised in the light of subsequent developments and evidence. These mechanisms could potentially involve any or all branches of government, as well as the public, the press, and professional organizations. Our findings also have implications for health system leaders in other countries. The Israeli experience can help them identify key capacities to develop during non-emergency periods, thus positioning themselves to respond more rapidly in an emergency. Finally, health system leaders in other countries could monitor Israel's rapid responses to future global health emergencies and adopt selected actions in their own countries.

Mitigating the regressivity of private mechanisms of financing healthcare: An Assessment of 29 countries.

Progressive financing of health care can help advance the equity and financial protection goals of health systems. All countries' health systems are financed in part through private mechanisms, including out-of-pocket payments and voluntary health insurance. Yet little is known about how these financing schemes are structured, and the extent to which policies in place mitigate regressivity. This study identifies the potential policies to mitigate regressivity in private financing, builds two qualitative tools to comparatively assess regressivity of these two sources of revenue, and applies this tool to a selection of 29 high-income countries. It provides new evidence on the variations in policy approaches taken, and resultant regressivity, of private mechanisms of financing health care. These results inform a comprehensive assessment of progressivity of health systems financing, considering all revenue streams, that appears in this special section of the journal.

The COVID-19 pandemic posed many dilemmas for policymakers, which sometimes resulted in unprecedented decision-making.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic evolved through five phases, beginning with 'the great threat', then moving through 'the emergence of variants', 'vaccines euphoria', and 'the disillusionment', and culminating in 'a disease we can live with'. Each phase required a different governance response. With the progress of the pandemic, data were collected, evidence was created, and health technology was developed and disseminated. Policymaking shifted from protecting the population by limiting infections with non-pharmaceutical interventions to controlling the pandemic by prevention of severe disease with vaccines and drugs for those infected. Once the vaccine became available, the state started devolving the responsibility for the individual's health and behavior. MAIN BODY: Each phase of the pandemic posed new and unique dilemmas for policymakers, which resulted in unprecedented decision-making. Restrictions to individual's rights such as a lockdown or the 'Green Pass policy' were unimaginable before the pandemic. One of the most striking decisions that the Ministry of Health made was approving the third (booster) vaccine dose in Israel, before it was approved by the FDA or any other country. It was possible to make an informed, evidence-based decision due to the availability of reliable and timely data. Transparent communication with the public probably promoted adherence to the booster dose recommendation. The boosters made an important contribution to public health, even though their uptake was less than the uptake for the initial doses. The decision to approve the booster illustrates seven key lessons from the pandemic: health technology is key; leadership is crucial (both political and professional); a single body should coordinate the actions of all stakeholders involved in the response, and these should collaborate closely; policymakers need to engage the public and win their trust and compliance; data are essential to build a suitable response; and nations and international organizations should collaborate in preparing for and responding to pandemics, because viruses travel without borders. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic posed many dilemmas for policymakers. The lessons learned from the actions taken to deal with them should be incorporated into preparedness for future challenges.

Coping with COVID-19: the role of hospital care structures and capacity expansion in five countries.

This contribution examines the responses of five health systems in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: Denmark, Germany, Israel, Spain and Sweden. The aim is to understand to what extent this crisis response of these countries was resilient. The study focuses on hospital care structures, considering both existing capacity before the pandemic and the management and expansion of capacity during the crisis. Evaluation criteria include flexibility in the use of existing resources and response planning, as well as the ability to create surge capacity. Data were collected from country experts using a structured questionnaire. Main findings are that not only the total number but also the availability of hospital beds is critical to resilience, as is the ability to mobilise (highly) qualified personnel. Indispensable for rapid capacity adjustment is the availability of data. Countries with more centralised hospital care structures, more sophisticated concepts for providing specialised services and stronger integration of the inpatient and outpatient sectors have clear structural advantages. A solid digital infrastructure is also conducive. Finally, a centralised governance structure is crucial for flexibility and adaptability. In decentralised systems, robust mechanisms to coordinate across levels are important to strengthen health care system resilience in pandemic situations and beyond.

Work like a Doc: A comparison of regulations on residents' working hours in 14 high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Medical residents work long, continuous hours. Working in conditions of extreme fatigue has adverse effects on the quality and safety of care, and on residents' quality of life. Many countries have attempted to regulate residents' work hours. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to review residents' work hours regulations in different countries with an emphasis on night shifts. METHODS: Standardized qualitative data on residents' working hours were collected with the assistance of experts from 14 high-income countries through a questionnaire. An international comparative analysis was performed. RESULTS: All countries reviewed limit the weekly working hours; North-American countries limit to 60-80 h, European countries limit to 48 h. In most countries, residents work 24 or 26 consecutive hours, but the number of long overnight shifts varies, ranging from two to ten. Many European countries face difficulties in complying with the weekly hour limit and allow opt-out contracts to exceed it. CONCLUSIONS: In the countries analyzed, residents still work long hours. Attempts to limit the shift length or the weekly working hours resulted in modest improvements in residents' quality of life with mixed effects on quality of care and residents' education.

It probably worked: a Bayesian approach to evaluating the introduction of activity-based hospital payment in Israel.

BACKGROUND: In 2013-2014, Israel accelerated adoption of activity-based payments to hospitals. While the effects of such payments on patient length of stay (LoS) have been examined in several countries, there have been few analyses of incentive effects in the Israeli context of capped reimbursements and stretched resources. METHODS: We examined administrative data from the Israel Ministry of Health for 14 procedures from 2005 to 2016 in all not-for-profit hospitals (97% of the acute care beds). Survival analyses using a Weibull distribution allowed us to examine the non-negative and right-skewed data. We opted for a Bayesian approach to estimate relative change in LoS. RESULTS: LoS declined in 7 of 14 procedures analyzed, notably, in 6 out of 7 urological procedures. In these procedures, reduction in LoS ranged between 11% and 20%. The estimation results for the control variables are mixed and do not indicate a clear pattern of association with LoS. CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in LoS freed resources to treat other patients, which may have resulted in reduced waiting times. It may have been more feasible to reduce LoS for urological procedures since these had relatively long LoS. Policymakers should pay attention to the effects of decreases in LoS on quality of care. Stretched hospital resources, capped reimbursements, retrospective subsidies and underpriced procedures may have limited hospitals' ability to reduce LoS for other procedures where no decrease occurred (e.g., general surgery).

Dual Agency in Hospitals: What Strategies Do Managers and Physicians Apply to Reconcile Dilemmas Between Clinical and Economic Considerations?

BACKGROUND: Hospital professionals are "dual agents" who may face dilemmas between their commitment to patients' clinical needs and hospitals' financial sustainability. This study examines whether and how hospital professionals balance or reconcile clinical and economic considerations in their decision-making in two countries with activity-based payment systems. METHODS: We conducted 46 semi-structured interviews with hospital managers, chief physicians and practicing physicians in five German and five Israeli hospitals in 2018/2019. We used thematic analysis to identify common topics and patterns of meaning. RESULTS: Hospital professionals report many situations in which activity-based payment incentivizes proper treatment, and clinical and economic considerations are aligned. This is the case when efficiency can be improved, eg, by curbing unnecessary expenditures or specializing in certain procedures. When considerations are misaligned, hospital professionals have developed a range of strategies that may contribute to balancing competing considerations. These include 'reshaping management,' such as better planning of the entire course of treatment and improvement of the coding; and 'reframing decision-making,' which involves working with averages and developing tool-kits for decision-making. CONCLUSION: Misalignment of economic and clinical considerations does not necessarily have negative implications, if professionals manage to balance and reconcile them. Context is important in determining if considerations can be reconciled or not. Reconciling strategies are fragile and can be easily disrupted depending on context. Creating tool-kits for better decision-making, planning the treatment course in advance, working with averages, and having interdisciplinary teams to think together about ways to improve efficiency can help mitigate dilemmas of hospital professionals.

Governance of academic medical centres in changing healthcare systems: An international comparison.

We provide an explorative and international comparison of the governance models of academic medical centres (AMCs). These centres face significant challenges, including disruptive external pressures and enduring financial conflicts pertaining to patient treatment, research and education. Therefore, we covered 10 European countries (Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland and Spain) and one associated state (Israel) in our analysis. In addition, we developed an expert questionnaire to collect data on the governance of AMCs in these 11 countries. Our results revealed no standardised definition of AMCs, with countries combining patient care, education/teaching and research differently. However, the ownership of such institutions is significantly homogeneous and is limited to public or private, nonprofit ownership. Furthermore, significant differences are associated with the (functional) integration level between the hospital and medical school. Therefore, most experts believe that the governance of AMCs will evolve into a more functionally integrated model of patient care, research and education.

Early health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Mediterranean countries: A tale of successes and challenges.

This paper conducts a comparative review of the (curative) health systems' response taken by Cyprus, Greece, Israel, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, these Mediterranean countries shared similarities in terms of health system resources, which were low compared to the EU/OECD average. We distill key policy insights regarding the governance tools adopted to manage the pandemic, the means to secure sufficient physical infrastructure and workforce capacity and some financing and coverage aspects. We performed a qualitative analysis of the evidence reported to the 'Health System Response Monitor' platform of the European Observatory by country experts. We found that governance in the early stages of the pandemic was undertaken centrally in all the Mediterranean countries, even in Italy and Spain where regional authorities usually have autonomy over health matters. Stretched public resources prompted countries to deploy "flexible" intensive care unit capacity and health workforce resources as agile solutions. The private sector was also utilized to expand resources and health workforce capacity, through special public-private partnerships. Countries ensured universal coverage for COVID-19-related services, even for groups not usually entitled to free publicly financed health care, such as undocumented migrants. We conclude that flexibility, speed and adaptive management in health policy responses were key to responding to immediate needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Financial barriers to accessing care as well as potentially higher mortality rates were avoided in most of the countries during the first wave. Yet it is still early to assess to what extent countries were able to maintain essential services without undermining equitable access to high quality care.

Balancing financial incentives during COVID-19: A comparison of provider payment adjustments across 20 countries.

Provider payment mechanisms were adjusted in many countries in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Our objective was to review adjustments for hospitals and healthcare professionals across 20 countries. We developed an analytical framework distinguishing between payment adjustments compensating income loss and those covering extra costs related to COVID-19. Information was extracted from the Covid-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) and classified according to the framework. We found that income loss was not a problem in countries where professionals were paid by salary or capitation and hospitals received global budgets. In countries where payment was based on activity, income loss was compensated through budgets and higher fees. New FFS payments were introduced to incentivize remote services. Payments for COVID-19 related costs included new fees for out- and inpatient services but also new PD and DRG tariffs for hospitals. Budgets covered the costs of adjusting wards, creating new (ICU) beds, and hiring staff. We conclude that public payers assumed most of the COVID-19-related financial risk. In view of future pandemics policymakers should work to increase resilience of payment systems by: (1) having systems in place to rapidly adjust payment systems; (2) being aware of the economic incentives created by these adjustments such as cost-containment or increasing the number of patients or services, that can result in unintended consequences such as risk selection or overprovision of care; and (3) periodically evaluating the effects of payment adjustments on access and quality of care.

Israel's rapid rollout of vaccinations for COVID-19.

As of the end of 2020, the State of Israel, with a population of 9.3 million, had administered more COVID-19 vaccine doses than all countries aside from China, the US, and the UK. Moreover, Israel had administered almost 11.0 doses per 100 population, while the next highest rates were 3.5 (in Bahrain) and 1.4 (in the United Kingdom). All other countries had administered less than 1 dose per 100 population.While Israel's rollout of COVID-19 vaccinations was not problem-free, its initial phase had clearly been rapid and effective. A large number of factors contributed to this early success, and they can be divided into three major groups.The first group of factors consists of long-standing characteristics of Israel which are extrinsic to health care. They include: Israel's small size (in terms of both area and population), a relatively young population, relatively warm weather in December 2020, a centralized national system of government, and well-developed infrastructure for implementing prompt responses to large-scale national emergencies.The second group of factors are also long-standing, but they are health-system specific. They include: the organizational, IT and logistical capacities of Israel's community-based health care providers, the availability of a cadre of well-trained, salaried, community-based nurses who are directly employed by those providers, a tradition of effective cooperation between government, health plans, hospitals, and emergency care providers - particularly during national emergencies; and support tools and decisionmaking frameworks to support vaccination campaigns.The third group consists of factors that are more recent and are specific to the COVID-19 vaccination effort. They include: the mobilization of special government funding for vaccine purchase and distribution, timely contracting for a large amount of vaccines relative to Israel's population, the use of simple, clear and easily implementable criteria for determining who had priority for receiving vaccines in the early phases of the distribution process, a creative technical response that addressed the demanding cold storage requirements of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, and well-tailored outreach efforts to encourage Israelis to sign up for vaccinations and then show up to get vaccinated.While many of these facilitating factors are not unique to Israel, part of what made the Israeli rollout successful was its combination of facilitating factors (as opposed to each factor being unique separately) and the synergies it created among them. Moreover, some high-income countries (including the US, the UK, and Canada) are lacking several of these facilitating factors, apparently contributing to the slower pace of the rollout in those countries.

Addressing vaccine hesitancy and access barriers to achieve persistent progress in Israel's COVID-19 vaccination program.

As of March 31, 2021, Israel had administered 116 doses of vaccine for COVID-19 per 100 population (of any age) - far more than any other OECD country. It was also ahead of other OECD countries in terms of the share of the population that had received at least one vaccination (61%) and the share that had been fully vaccinated (55%). Among Israelis aged 16 and over, the comparable figures were 81 and 74%, respectively. In light of this, the objectives of this article are: 1. To describe and analyze the vaccination uptake through the end of March 2021 2. To identify behavioral and other barriers that likely affected desire or ability to be vaccinated 3. To describe the efforts undertaken to overcome those barriers Israel's vaccination campaign was launched on December 20, and within 2.5 weeks, 20% of Israelis had received their first dose. Afterwards, the pace slowed. It took an additional 4 weeks to increase from 20 to 40% and yet another 6 weeks to increase from 40 to 60%. Initially, uptake was low among young adults, and two religious/cultural minority groups - ultra-Orthodox Jews and Israeli Arabs, but their uptake increased markedly over time.In the first quarter of 2021, Israel had to enhance access to the vaccine, address a moderate amount of vaccine hesitancy in its general population, and also address more intense pockets of vaccine hesitancy among young adults and religious/cultural minority groups. A continued high rate of infection during the months of February and March, despite broad vaccination coverage at the time, created confusion about vaccine effectiveness, which in turn contributed to vaccine hesitancy. Among Israeli Arabs, some residents of smaller villages encountered difficulties in reaching vaccination sites, and that also slowed the rate of vaccination.The challenges were addressed via a mix of messaging, incentives, extensions to the initial vaccine delivery system, and other measures. Many of the measures addressed the general population, while others were targeted at subgroups with below-average vaccination rates. Once the early adopters had been vaccinated, it took hard, creative work to increase population coverage from 40 to 60% and beyond.Significantly, some of the capacities and strategies that helped Israel address vaccine hesitancy and geographic access barriers are different from those that enabled it to procure, distribute and administer the vaccines. Some of these strategies are likely to be relevant to other countries as they progress from the challenges of securing an adequate vaccine supply and streamlining distribution to the challenge of encouraging vaccine uptake.

The Israeli Experience with the "Green Pass" Policy Highlights Issues to Be Considered by Policymakers in Other Countries.

In the first half of 2021, Israel had been ahead of other countries concerning the speed of its rollout and coverage of COVID-19 vaccinations. During that time, Israel had implemented a vaccine certificate policy, the "Green Pass Policy" (GPP), to reduce virus spread and to allow the safe relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions in a time of great uncertainty. Based on an analysis of GPP regulations and public statements compiled from the Israeli Ministry of Health website, we describe the design and implementation of the GPP. We also look back and discuss lessons learned for countries that are considering a GPP policy, given the current upsurge of the Delta variant as of summer 2021. To reduce equity concerns when introducing a GPP, all population groups should be eligible for the vaccine (contingent on approval from the manufacturer) and have access to it. Alternatively, health authorities can grant temporary certificates based on a negative test. We also highlight the fact that in practice, there will be gaps between the GPP regulations and implementation. While some places might require a GPP without legal need, others will not implement it despite a legal obligation. The GPP regulations should have standardised epidemiological criteria, be implemented gradually, remain flexible, and change according to the epidemiological risks.

Effects of Activity-Based Hospital Payments in Israel: A Qualitative Evaluation Focusing on the Perspectives of Hospital Managers and Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Since 2010, Israel has expanded the adoption of procedure-related group (PRG) based payments for hospitals. While there is a rich quantitative literature that assesses the effects of payment reforms on efficiency or quality of care, very few qualitative studies have focused on the impacts of diagnosis-related group (DRG)-like payments on hospitals from the perspective of hospital workers as change agents. METHODS: We used a qualitative, thematic analysis based on 33 semi-structured in-depth interviews with chief executive officers (CEOs), chief financial officers (CFOs), ward directors and physicians conducted in five public hospitals in Israel, sampled by maximum variation according to hospital characteristics. RESULTS: Interviewees reported that the payment reform led to organizational changes such as increased transparency and enhanced supervision. Interviewees also reported several actions in response to the economic incentives of PRG-based payment. These included (1) shifting activities to afterhours and using operating rooms (ORs) more efficiently to enable increased surgical volumes; (2) reducing costs by shortening lengths of stay and increasing cost-consciousness in procurement; and (3) increasing revenues by improving coding and selecting procedures. Moderating factors reduced the effects of the reform. For example, organizational factors such as the public nature of hospitals or the (un)availability of healthcare resources did not always allow hospitals to increase the number of cases treated. Also, conflicting incentives such as multiple payment mechanisms or underpricing of procedures blurred the incentives of the reform. Finally, managers and physicians have many other considerations that outweigh the economic ones. CONCLUSION: PRG payments affected the organizational dynamics of hospitals and changed decision-making about admission and treatment policies. However, such effects were moderated by many other factors that should be considered when shaping and analyzing hospital payment reforms.

Mapping variability in allocation of Long-Term Care funds across payer agencies in OECD countries.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term care (LTC) is organized in a fragmented manner. Payer agencies (PA) receive LTC funds from the agency collecting funds, and commission services. Yet, distributional equity (DE) across PAs, a precondition to geographical equity of access to LTC, has received limited attention. We conceptualize that LTC systems promote DE when they are designed to set eligibility criteria nationally (vs. locally); and to distribute funds among PAs based on needs-formula (vs. past-budgets or government decisions). OBJECTIVES: This cross-country study highlights to what extent different LTC systems are designed to promote DE across PAs, and the parameters used in allocation formulae. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through a questionnaire filled by experts from 17 OECD countries. RESULTS: 11 out of 25 LTC systems analyzed, fully meet DE as we defined. 5 systems which give high autonomy to PAs have designs with low levels of DE; while nine systems partially promote DE. Allocation formulae vary in their complexity as some systems use simple demographic parameters while others apply socio-economic status, disability, and LTC cost variations. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: A minority of LTC systems fully meet DE, which is only one of the criteria in allocation of LTC resources. Some systems prefer local priority-setting and governance over DE. Countries that value DE should harmonize the eligibility criteria at the national level and allocate funds according to needs across regions.