Case-mix adjustment and efficiency measurement

Abstract

Aims: The importance of using valid case-mix systems in long-term care is addressed by comparing the predictive power of different case-mix models, and by applying them in the calculation of technical efficiency scores of care units. Methods: To construct different case-mix models a statistical clustering technique (Automatic Interaction Detection) was used. Technical efficiency score were calculated using data envelopment analysis (DEA). Results: The Resource Utilization Groups (RUG-III/22) classification explained 39% of resident specific cost, compared with 16% for a functional dependency scale in the Finnish patient information system HILMO. Conclusion: When assessing the economic performance of long-term care units it is important to pay attention to the predictive validity of the case-mix measure to be used. The choice of case-mix measure significantly affected how units were rated in efficiency.

Keywords

case mix data envelopment analysis efficiency measurement long-term care Resource Utilization Groups.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Fries BE , Schneider DP , Foley WJ , Gavazzi M. , Burke R. , Cornelius E. Refining a case mix measure for nursing homes: Resource Utilization Groups (RUG-III). Medical Care 1994; 32: 668 - 85.

Grimaldi PL , Jatzwiecki T. Case-mix payment systems. Chicago: Pluribus, 1987.

Fries BE Comparing case-mix systems for nursing home payment. Health Care Financing Rev 1990; 11: 103 - 19.

Weissert WG , Musliner MC Case mix adjusted nursing-home reimbursement: a critical review of evidence . Milbank Q 1992; 70: 455 - 90.

Morris JN , Hawes C. , Fries BE , et al. Designing the National Resident Assessment Instrument for Nursing Homes. Gerontologist 1990; 30: 293 - 307.

Björkgren MA , Häkkinen U. , Finne-Soveri UH Validity and reliability of Resource Utilization Groups (RUG-III/22) in Finnish long-term care facilities. Scand J Public Health 1999; 27: 228 - 34.

Stakes. HILMO. Sosiaali- ja terveydenhuollon hoitoilmoitus. Ohjeita ja luokituksia 1994 : 1.

Austin Data Management PC-Group. Austin, TX: Austin Data Management, 1993 , 2004.

Morgan JN , Sonquist JA Problems in the analysis of survey data and a proposal. J Am Stat Assoc 1963; 58: 415 - 34.

10.

Farrell MJ The measurement of productive efficiency. J Roy Stat Soc, series A 1957; 120: 253 - 81.

11.

Charnes A. , Cooper WW , Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. Eur J Operational Res 1978; 2: 429 - 44.

12.

Charnes A , Cooper WW, Lewin & Rhodes , editors. Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology and applications . Boston: Kluwer, 1995.

13.

Björkgren MA , Häkkinen U. , Linna M. A comparison of methods for determining efficiency of Finnish long-term care units. Sosiaalilääketieteellinen aikakauslehti 2000; 37: 216 - 22.

14.

Björkgren MA , Häkkinen U. , Linna M. Measuring efficiency of Finnish long-term care units. Health Care Management Sci 2001; 4: 193 - 200.

15.

Hawes C. , Morris JN , Phillips CD , Mor V. , Fries BE , Nonemaker S. Reliability estimates for the minimum data set for nursing home resident assessment and care screening (MDS). Gerontologist 1995 ; 35: 172 - 8.

16.

Sgádari A. , Morris JN , Fries BE , et al. Efforts to establish the reliability of the resident assessment instrument. Age Ageing 1997; 26(2, Suppl.): 27 - 31.

17.

Williams BC , Fries BE , Foley WJ , Schneider D. , Gavazzi M. Activities of daily living and costs in nursing homes. Health Care Financing Rev 1994; 15: 117 - 35.