Verhaltensänderung durch Einführung der Praxisgebühr und Ursachenforschung

Ambulatory specialist costs and morbidity of coordinated and uncoordinated patients before and after abolition of copayment: A cohort analysis

To strengthen the coordinating function of general practitioners (GPs) in the German healthcare system, a copayment of €10 was introduced in 2004. Due to a perceived lack of efficacy and a high administrative burden, it was abolished in 2012. The present cohort study investigates characteristics and differences of GP-coordinated and uncoordinated patients in Bavaria, Germany, concerning morbidity and ambulatory specialist costs and whether these differences have changed after the abolition of the copayment. We performed a retrospective routine data analysis, using claims data of the Bavarian Association of the Statutory Health Insurance Physicians during the period 2011–2012 (with copayment) and 2013–2016 (without copayment), covering 24 quarters. Coordinated care was defined as specialist contact only with referral. Multinomial regression modelling, including inverse probability of treatment weighting, was used for the cohort analysis of 500 000 randomly selected patients. Longitudinal regression models were calculated for cost estimation. Coordination of care decreased substantially after the abolition of the copayment, accompanied by increasing proportions of patients with chronic and mental diseases in the uncoordinated group, and a corresponding decrease in the coordinated group. In the presence of the copayment, uncoordinated patients had €21.78 higher specialist costs than coordinated patients, increasing to €24.94 after its abolition. The results indicate that patients incur higher healthcare costs for specialist ambulatory care when their care is uncoordinated. This effect slightly increased after abolition of the copayment. Beyond that, the abolition of the copayment led to a substantial reduction in primary care coordination, particularly affecting vulnerable patients. Therefore, coordination of care in the ambulatory setting should be strengthened.

Impact of the abolition of copayments on the GP-centred coordination of care in Bavaria, Germany: analysis of routinely collected claims data

OBJECTIVES

In 2012, Germany abolished copayment for consultations in ambulatory care. This study investigated the effect of the abolition on general practitioner (GP)-centred coordination of care. We assessed how the proportion of patients with coordinated specialist care changed over time when copayment to all specialist services were removed. Furthermore, we studied how the number of ambulatory emergency cases and apparent 'doctor shopping' changed after the abolition.

DESIGN

A retrospective routine data analysis of the Bavarian Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, comparing the years 2011 and 2012 (with copayment), with the period from 2013 to 2016 (without copayment). Therefore, time series analyses covering 24 quarters were performed.

SETTING

Primary care in Bavaria, Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

All statutorily insured patients in Bavaria, aged ≥18 years, with at least one ambulatory specialist contact between 2011 and 2016.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was the percentage of patients with GP-coordinated care (every regular specialist consultation within a quarter was preceded by a GP referral). Secondary outcomes were the number of ambulatory emergency cases and apparent 'doctor shopping'.

RESULTS

After the abolition, the proportion of coordinated patients decreased from 49.6% (2011) to 15.5% (2016). Overall, younger patients and those living in areas with lower levels of deprivation showed the lowest proportions of coordination, which further decreased after abolition. Additionally, there were concomitant increases in the number of ambulatory emergency contacts and to a lesser extent in the number of patients with apparent 'doctor shopping'.

CONCLUSIONS

The abolition of copayment in Germany was associated with a substantial decrease in GP coordination of specialist care. This suggests that the copayment was a partly effective tool to support coordinated care. Future studies are required to investigate how the gatekeeping function of GPs in Germany can best be strengthened while minimising the associated administrative overhead.

Forgone care among chronically ill patients in Germany-Results from a cross-sectional survey with 15,565 individuals

The decision not to seek health care although one feels that care is needed (forgone care), is influenced by various factors. Within the study "Responsiveness in ambulatory care" 15,565 chronically ill (coronary heart disease and/or type 2 diabetes) patients in Germany were surveyed in 2013. The survey included questions on forgone care, perceived discrimination when seeking care, net-income, subjective health status and subjective socioeconomic status (subSES). Survey data were linked on patient-level with administrative claims data by a German sickness fund. We applied multivariate binomial logistic regression analyses to assess the association between age, sex, comorbidities, living area, subjective health status, subSES, experienced discrimination, net-equivalent income and reported forgone care. The majority in the sample are men (71.4%), the average age is 69.4 (SD: 10.2) years and 14.1% reported forgone care. In the multivariate model, we find that younger age, female gender, perceived discrimination, depression, and a poor subjective health status increase the odds of reporting forgone care. Overall, our results suggest that a negative experience with the health care system, i.e. perceived discrimination/unfair treatment, are strong predictors of forgone care among the chronically ill.

Copayments for ambulatory care in Germany: a natural experiment using a difference-in-difference approach

In response to increasing health expenditures and a high number of physician visits, the German government introduced a copayment for ambulatory care in 2004 for individuals with statutory health insurance (SHI). Because persons with private insurance were exempt from the copayments, this health-care reform can be regarded as a natural experiment. We used a difference-in-difference approach to examine whether the new copayment effectively reduced the overall demand for physician visits and to explore whether it acted as a deterrent to vulnerable groups, such as those with low income or chronic conditions. We found that there was no significant reduction in the number of physician visits among SHI members compared to our control group. At the same time, we did not observe a deterrent effect among vulnerable individuals. Thus, the copayment has failed to reduce the demand for physician visits. It is likely that this result is due to the design of the copayment scheme, as the copayment is low and is paid only for the first physician visit per quarter.

Access and choice – competition under the roof of solidarity in German health care: an analysis of health policy reforms since 2004

This paper analyses the influence of recent German health care reforms, the Statutory Health Insurance Modernization Act 2004 and the Statutory Health Insurance Competition Strengthening Act 2007, on different dimensions of access and choice. More specifically, we look at and discuss the effects of these policies on the availability, reachability and affordability of health care as well as on their impact on consumers’ choice of insurers and providers. Generally, patients in Germany enjoy a high degree of free access and a lot of freedom to choose, partly leading to over- and misuse of health services. Concerning choice of insurers, one result of our analysis is that in the statutory health insurance system, the introduction of a greater variety of benefit packages will develop into an additional parameter of choice. In contrast to that, insurees more and more accept certain restrictions of choice and direct access to providers by enrolling into new forms of care (such as gatekeeping-, disease management- and integrated care programmes). However, they might benefit from better quality of care and more options for products and services that best fit their needs.