Health insurance deductions in Iranian public hospitals before and after the health transformation plan.

Background: Developing countries, such as Iran, have been struggling with high rates of insurance deduction. As part of the Health Transformation Plan (HTP) in Iran, a new reference book was introduced to update the medical tariffs. This study aimed to compare the rates and extent of insurance deductions before and after HTP in Iran's public hospitals. Methods: This was a quasi-experimental study. Overall, 400 medical bills were selected from Iran's national Health Information System using multilevel random sampling before and after HTP implementation (2014 and 2017). Insurance deductions were divided into 5 groups: (1) diagnostic procedures, (2) medication and medical appliances, (3) accommodation and human capital provision, (4) surgery, and (5) other services. Using STATA Version 14.0, independent t test and Fisher's exact test were used for data analysis. Significance level was set at 0.5. Results: There was a significant decrease in insurance deductions among Iran's Health Insurance (HI) and Social Security Insurance (SSI). Accordingly, before HTP, the average amount of insurance deductions was 58.9% and 71.3% in HI and SSI, respectively. Moreover, there was a significant decline in all 5 groups between the pre- and postimplementation of HTP (p<0.05). Based on the results, hospitalization time (OR=2.31, 95% CI=1.9-3.2), patients in general hospitals (OR=1.49, 95% CI=1.4-2.7), coverage by SSI (OR=2.54, 95% CI=1.8-5.6), and having surgery (OR=3.5, 95% CI=2.0-7.3) increase the chance of insurance deduction significantly (p<0.05). Conclusion: Findings of this study showed that after HTP, insurance deductions were decreased significantly. The causes of this decline may be due to the range of services covered by public insurances, increase in insurance coverage, and improvement in health providers-insurance companies communication.

A comparison of the earnings of specialist physicians and nurses before and after implementing the Iran's New Tariffs Book.

Background: The fair wage to specialist physicians and nurses can enhance their job motivation, quality of work, job satisfaction level, and improve the delivery of services to patients. The present study aimed to compare the proportion of changes in earnings of specialist physicians and nurses before and after implementing the Iran's New Tariffs Book and compare their average income with a number of selected countries. Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted cross-sectional in the hospitals affiliated to Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS) in 2016. Six months before and after the announcement and implementation of the Iran's New Tariffs Book, the relative values of healthcare services were compared. Study population included all specialist physicians and nurses working in the hospitals affiliated to IUMS. Sample size was determined by sampling formula. Results: The proportion of changes in the income of medical specialists and nurses after establishing the book varied between 8% and 184%. Based on our findings, the highest increases were observed in internal medicine (184%), surgery (160%), gastroenterology (153%), and pediatrics (120%), whereas, the lowest ones belonged to ophthalmology (8%), emergency medicine (11%), neurology (24%) and anesthesia (32%). Nurses' income was surged by 43%. Conclusion: Pursuant to the findings, the income belonged to all examined medical specialists and nursing groups has increased after implementing the Iran's New Tariffs Book. The result suggested that income differences among groups have been broadened after the implementation of the Book. There was a wide and significant difference in specialist physicians' income vis-à-vis nursing groups' income before and after establishing the New Book.

Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening and treatment methods: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Due to extensive literature in the field of lung cancer and their heterogeneous results, the aim of this study was to systematically review of systematic reviews studies which reviewed the cost-effectiveness of various lung cancer screening and treatment methods. METHODS: In this systematic review of systematic reviews study, required data were collected searching the following key words which selected from Mesh: "lung cancer", "lung oncology", "lung Carcinoma", "lung neoplasm", "lung tumors", "cost- effectiveness", "systematic review" and "Meta-analysis". The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane Library electronic databases, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Two reviewers (RA and A-AS) evaluated the articles according to the checklist of "assessment of multiple systematic reviews" (AMSTAR) tool. RESULTS: Overall, information of 110 papers was discussed in eight systematic reviews. Authors focused on cost-effectiveness of lung cancer treatments in five systematic reviews. Targeted therapy options (bevacizumab, Erlotinib and Crizotinib) show an acceptable cost-effectiveness. Results of three studies failed to show cost-effectiveness of screening methods. None of the studies had used the meta-analysis method. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) tool and Drummond checklist were mostly used in assessing the quality of articles. Most perspective was related to the Payer (64 times) and the lowest was related to Social (11times). Most cases referred to Incremental analysis (82%) and also the lowest point of referral was related to Discounting (in 49% of the cases). The average quality score of included studies was calculated 9.2% from 11. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted therapy can be an option for the treatment of lung cancer. Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of computerized tomographic colonography (CTC) in lung cancer screening is recommended. The perspective of the community should be more taken into consideration in studies of cost-effectiveness. Paying more attention to the topic of Discounting will be necessary in the studies.

Economic evaluation of test-and-treat and empirical treatment strategies in the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection; A Markov model in an Iranian adult population.

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori may cause many gastrointestinal problems in developing countries such as Iran. We aimed to analyze the cost- effectiveness and cost- utility of the test-and-treat and empirical treatment strategies in managing Helicobacter pylori infection. METHODS: This was a Markov based economic evaluation. Effectiveness was defined as the symptoms free numbers and QALYs in 100,000 hypothetical adults. The sensitivity analysis was based on Monte Carlo approach. RESULTS: In the test- and- treat strategy, if the serology is the first diagnostic test vs. histology, the cost per symptoms free number would be 291,736.1 Rials while the cost per QALYs would be 339,226.1 Rials. The cost per symptoms free number and cost per QALYs when the 13 C-UBT was used as the first diagnostic test vs. serology was 1,283,200 and 1,492,103 Rials, respectively. In the empirical strategy, if histology is used as the first diagnostic test vs. 13 CUBT, the cost per symptoms free numbers and cost per QALYs would be 793,234 and 955,698 Rials, respectively. If serology were used as the first diagnostic test vs. histology, the cost per symptoms free and QALYs would be 793,234 and 368941 Rials, respectively. CONCLUSION: There was no significant and considerable dominancy between the alternatives and the diagnostic tests.

Identification of the most appropriate variables for measuring the efficiency of Iranian public hospitals: Using Delphi technique.

CONTEXT: Selecting variables is a fundamental step in evaluating comparative efficiency because the results of measuring efficiency depend on the used variables. AIMS: The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive set of input and output variables for measuring efficiency with an emphasis on application in general hospitals in Iran. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study comprised a literature review followed by a Delphi survey process. After extracting the variables from the literature review in order to reach consensus on them and identify the native variables, the researchers used the Delphi technique in three rounds. Thirty Iranian hospital managers, in Alborz, Saveh, Qazvin, Qom, and Hamadan universities, participated in this study. For analysis, the interquartile range (IQR) and median were used. IQR was used to assess the agreement of Delphi panel members. RESULTS: After literature review, nine indicators were identified as input variables and 11 indicators were identified as output variables. After the proposed changes by Delphi members, 24 input variables and 24 output variables were identified to measure hospital efficacy. Finally, ten variables were selected as inputs and ten variables were selected as outputs to measure the performance of public hospitals in Iran by using the consensus of the members in the Delphi panel. CONCLUSIONS: This study proposes a framework for selecting the most appropriate variables for measuring the hospital efficiency with an emphasis on nonparametric methods. Choosing variables to measure hospital efficiency requires infrastructure such as an intelligent information system.