Sistem Pembayaran Mixed Method INA-CBGs dan Global Budget di Rumah Sakit: Tahap 1 Uji Coba Mixed Method INA-CBGs-Global Budget di Indonesia

AbstrakTidak ada sistem pembayaran pelayanan kesehatan yang sempurna dalam penerapannya termasuk sistem pembayaran DRG (Diagnosis-Related Groups) yang lebih dikenal dengan nama INA-CBGs (Indonesia Case-Based Groups) di Indonesia. Beberapa negara yang mengadopsi DRG telah menerapkan kebijakan pembayaran mixed method DRG-Global Budget dengan variasi implementasinya demi menjaga kesinambungan sistem jaminan kesehatan nasional di negaranya. BPJS Kesehatan menginisiasi studi operasional penerapan sistem pembayaran rumah sakit mixed-method INA-CBGs dan Global Budget mulai tahun 2018. Terdapat tiga tahapan dalam uji coba sistem pembayaran rumah sakit mixed-method INA-CBGs dan Global Budget ini. Tahap pertama adalah Global Budget Tanpa Resiko yang bertujuan untuk menguji metode penghitungan global budget dan mengidentifikasi tantangan yang dihadapi bila kebijakan mixed method INA-CBGs dan Global Budget ini diberlakukan. Studi dilakukan di 5 (lima) kabupaten/kota di 30 rumah sakit (RS). Hasil studi menunjukkan bahwa metodologi penghitungan global budget yang diterapkan cukup akurat untuk memprediksi realisasi klaim di RS. Penghitungan global budget di tingkat kabupaten/kota lebih akurat hasilnya dibandingkan dengan menghitung global budget di tingkat RS karena mengakomodir shifting pasien dari RS yang satu ke RS yang lainnya akibat perubahan kapasitas RS. Perubahan kapasitas RS di tahun berjalan dan adanya pandemi COVID-19 menyebabkan adanya selisih antara penghitungan global budget dan realisasi klaim.AbstractWhen it comes to provider payment system, no one shoe fits all including DRG payment system which in Indonesia are known as INA-CBGs. In some countries that used DRG have mixed it with Global Budget in various mechanisms to maintain the sustainability of the national health insurance system in their countries. BPJS Kesehatan initiated a three-stage pilot study on the implementation of the mixed-method hospital payment system INA-CBGs and Global Budget starting in 2018. The first stage is the Non-Risk stage which aims to test the accuracy of the global budget calculation and prediction and to identify the challenges faced when the mixed-method payment is implemented. The pilot was conducted in 5 districts in 30 hospitals. Initial results show that the calculation and prediction method is accurate to predict the actual hospital claims in the following year. The calculation of the global budget at the district level is more accurate than the hospital level because it accommodates patient transfer from one hospital to another due to changes in hospital capacity. Changes in hospital capacity in the current year and the COVID-19 pandemic requires some adjustments to the budget calculation

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: A systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Background: A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. Findings In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97\ub71 (95% UI 95\ub78-98\ub71) in Iceland, followed by 96\ub76 (94\ub79-97\ub79) in Norway and 96\ub71 (94\ub75-97\ub73) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18\ub76 (13\ub71-24\ub74) in the Central African Republic, 19\ub70 (14\ub73-23\ub77) in Somalia, and 23\ub74 (20\ub72-26\ub78) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91\ub75 (89\ub71-93\ub76) in Beijing to 48\ub70 (43\ub74-53\ub72) in Tibet (a 43\ub75-point difference), while India saw a 30\ub78-point disparity, from 64\ub78 (59\ub76-68\ub78) in Goa to 34\ub70 (30\ub73-38\ub71) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4\ub78-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20\ub79-point to 17\ub70-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17\ub72-point to 20\ub74-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. Interpretation GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle- SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage hinges upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view-and subsequent provision-of quality health care for all populations

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: A systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Background A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Methods Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. Findings In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97·1 (95% UI 95·8-98·1) in Iceland, followed by 96·6 (94·9-97·9) in Norway and 96·1 (94·5-97·3) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18·6 (13·1-24·4) in the Central African Republic, 19·0 (14·3-23·7) in Somalia, and 23·4 (20·2-26·8) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91·5 (89·1-93·6) in Beijing to 48·0 (43·4-53·2) in Tibet (a 43·5-point difference), while India saw a 30·8-point disparity, from 64·8 (59·6-68·8) in Goa to 34·0 (30·3-38·1) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4·8-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20·9-point to 17·0-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17·2-point to 20·4-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. Interpretation GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle- SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage hinges upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view - and subsequent provision - of quality health care for all populations

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016.

BACKGROUND: A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. METHODS: Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita

Manajemen public Private Mix Penanggulangan Tuberkulosis Strategi Dots Dokter Praktek Swasta

01.53 hal.; ill.; 23 c

Optimalisasi Sistem Pelayanan Kesehatan Berjenjang pada Program Kartu Jakarta Sehat

Peningkatan jumlah kunjungan pasien ke rumah sakit pada awal masa pemberlakuan program Kartu Jakarta Sehat (KJS) disebabkan belum optimalnya sistem pelayanan kesehatan berjenjang. PT Asuransi Kesehatan (PT Askes) bersama Dinas Kesehatan DKI Jakarta melakukan berbagai upaya dalam bentuk paket intervensi untuk mengoptimalkan sistem tersebut. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi efektivitas paket intervensi PT Askes dan Dinas Kesehatan DKI Jakarta dalam meningkatkan optimilisasi sistem rujukan pelayanan kesehatan. Penelitian ini menggunakan survei potong lintang dengan metode pengambilan sampel acak pada puskesmas di DKI Jakarta terhadap hasil intervensi PT Askes. Hasil intervensi diukur melalui wawancara pada kepala puskesmas atau petugas yang mewakili. Data dianalisis menggunakan tes statistik nonparametrik, yaitu uji Wilcoxon dan regresi Generalized Linear Model. Penelitian dilakukan pada bulan Oktober 2013 hingga Februari 2014. Terdapat perbedaan bermakna pada keempat indikator, terjadinya peningkatan kunjungan peserta KJS dipengaruhi oleh ketersediaan tempat tidur, jumlah peserta KJS terdaftar, intervensi dalam bentuk regulasi, serta persentase pengangguran terbuka. Meskipun ada perbedaan signifikan setelah dikelola PT Askes, hal ini belum cukup membentuk persepsi puskesmas untuk berpendapat bahwa PT Askes memiliki andil dalam mengoptimalkan sistem pelayanan kesehatan berjenjang pada program KJS. Increasing the number of patient visits to the hospital at the beginning of the implementation Healthy Jakarta Card (KJS) program was claimed to be associated with optimization of health care referral system. PT Asuransi Kesehatan (PT Askes) with the DKI Jakarta Department of Health Service made efforts to improve the optimalization that system. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of intervention PT Askes’s and DKI Jakarta Departement Of Health’s packages in improving the optimization of health care referral system. This study used a cross sectional survey with a random sampling method in primary health centers in Jakarta related with the result of PT Askes’s intervention package. The result of intervention were conducted by interview to the head of the primary health center or officer representing. Data were analyzed with nonparametric statistical tests, using the Wilcoxon test and Generalized Linear Regression Model. The study was conducted in October 2013 until February 2014. There were significant differences between the four indicators, an increase in visits KJS participants are influenced by the availability of beds, number of participants registered KJS, intervention in the regulation, and the percentage of open unemployment. Although there were significant differences after managed by PT Askes, these efforts were not enough to make primary health centers perception that PT Askes has contributed to the optimization of health care referral system in KJS program

Optimalisasi Sistem Pelayanan Kesehatan Berjenjang pada Program Kartu Jakarta Sehat (KESMAS: Jurnal Kesehatan Masyarakat Nasional Vol.9 No.1, Agustus 2014)

Peningkatan jumlah kunjungan pasien ke rumah sakit pada awal masa pemberlakuan program Kartu Jakarta Sehat (KJS) disebabkan belum optimalnya sistem pelayanan kesehatan berjenjang. PT Asuransi Kesehatan (PT Askes) bersama Dinas Kesehatan DKI Jakarta melakukan berbagai upaya dalam bentuk paket intervensi untuk mengoptimalkan sistem tersebut. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi efektivitas paket intervensi PT Askes dan Dinas Kesehatan DKI Jakarta dalam meningkatkan optimilisasi sistem rujukan pelayanan kesehatan. Penelitian ini menggunakan survei potong lintang dengan metode pengambilan sampel acak pada puskesmas di DKI Jakarta terhadap hasil intervensi PT Askes. Hasil intervensi diukur melalui wawancara pada kepala puskesmas atau petugas yang mewakili. Data dianalisis menggunakan tes statistik nonparametrik, yaitu uji Wilcoxon dan regresi Generalized Linear Model. Penelitian dilakukan pada bulan Oktober 2013 hingga Februari 2014. Terdapat perbedaan bermakna pada keempat indikator, terjadinya peningkatan kunjungan peserta KJS dipengaruhi oleh ketersediaan tempat tidur, jumlah peserta KJS terdaftar, intervensi dalam bentuk regulasi, serta persentase pengangguran terbuka. Meskipun ada perbedaan signifikan setelah dikelola PT Askes, hal ini belum cukup membentuk persepsi puskesmas untuk berpendapat bahwa PT Askes memiliki andil dalam mengoptimalkan sistem pelayanan kesehatan berjenjang pada program KJS.100 hlm: 94: 29 c

Measuring performance on the Healthcare Access and Quality Index for 195 countries and territories and selected subnational locations: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

Background A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016