Background: The literature comparing private not-for-profit, for-profit, and government providers mostly relies on empirical evidence from high-income and established market economies. Studies from developing and transitional economies remain scarce, especially regarding patient case-mix and quality of care in public and private hospitals, even though countries such as China have expanded a mixed-ownership approach to service delivery. The purpose of this study is to compare the operations and performance of public and private hospitals in Guangdong Province, China, focusing on differences in patient case-mix and quality of care.

Methods: We analyze survey data collected from 362 government-owned and private hospitals in Guangdong Province in 2005, combining mandatorily reported administrative data with a survey instrument designed for this study. We use univariate and multi-variate regression analyses to compare hospital characteristics and to identify factors associated with simple measures of structural quality and patient outcomes.

Results: Compared to private hospitals, government hospitals have a higher average value of total assets, more pieces of expensive medical equipment, more employees, and more physicians (controlling for hospital beds, urban location, insurance network, and university affiliation). Government and for-profit private hospitals do not statistically differ in total staffing, although for-profits have proportionally more support staff and fewer medical
professionals. Mortality rates for non-government non-profit and for-profit hospitals do not statistically differ from those of government hospitals of similar size, accreditation level, and patient mix.

Conclusions: In combination with other evidence on health service delivery in China, our results suggest that changes in ownership type alone are unlikely to dramatically improve or harm overall quality. System incentives need to be designed to reward desired hospital performance and protect vulnerable patients, regardless of hospital ownership type.

This issue of the International Journal of Healthcare Finance and Economics features eight
articles evaluating different provider payment methods in comparative international perspective, with authors from Hungary, China, Thailand, the US, Switzerland, and Canada. These contributions illustrate how the array of incentives facing providers shapes their interpersonal, clinical, administrative, and investment decisions in ways that profoundly impact the performance of health care systems. Taken as a whole, the articles show that in addition to the specifics of the reimbursement or remuneration scheme for individual providers and provider organizations, other factors matter—including ownership, allocation of control rights (such as in public-private partnerships), and expectation of a bail-out (soft budget constraints). All of these facets of payment and accountability systems shape the quality and efficiency of service delivery.

Given an increasingly complex web of financial pressures on providers, studies have examined how hospitals’ overall financial health affects different aspects of hospital operations. In our study, we develop an empirical proxy for the concept of soft budget constraint (SBC, Kornai, Kyklos 39:3–30, 1986) as an alternative financialmeasure of a hospital’s overall financial health and offer an initial estimate of the effect of SBCs on hospital access and quality. An organization has a SBC if it can expect to be bailed out rather than shut down. Our conceptual model predicts that hospitals facing softer budget constraints will be associated with less aggressive cost control, and their quality may be better or worse, depending on the scope for damage to quality from noncontractible aspects of cost control. We find that hospitals with softer budget constraints are less likely to shut down safety net services. In addition, hospitals with softer budget constraints appear to have better mortality outcomes for elderly heart attack patients.

Using data from 276 general acute hospitals in the Pearl River Delta region of Guangdong Province from 2002 and 2004, we construct a preliminary metric of budget constraint softness. We find that, controlling for hospital size, ownership, and other factors, a Chinese hospital’s probability of receiving government financial support is inversely associated with the hospital’s previous net revenue, an association consistent with soft budget constraints.

Background.  The net value of increased health care spending remains unclear, especially for chronic diseases.

Objective. To assess value for money spent on medical care for patients with type 2 diabetes, using a “cost-of-living” approach.

Setting. Mayo Clinic Rochester, a not-for-profit integrated health care delivery system. 

Patients. 613 patients with type 2 diabetes: 36 diagnosed before 1985; 186 in 1985-96; 181 in 1997-99; and 210 in 2000-02.

Design. We compare the increase in inflation-adjusted annual health care spending with the value of changes in health status between 1997 and 2005.

Measurements. Measures of health status are (1) cardiovascular risk based on the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) equations, holding age and diabetes duration constant (“modifiable risk”); and (2) simulated outcomes for all diabetes complications using the UKPDS Outcomes Model. The present discounted value of improved survival and avoided treatment spending for coronary heart disease (CHD), net of the increase in annual spending per patient, yields net value.

Results. We estimate a total value of $20,824 per patient for quality improvement ($17,392 from reduction in modifiable risk of fatal CHD and fatal stroke, $3,432 from avoided CHD treatment spending), and a value net of cost of $10,911 per patient (95% confidence interval -$8,480, $33,402). A second approach to assessing value, using the UKPDS Outcomes Model, yields a net value of $6,931 per patient.

Conclusions. Our estimates of net value are positive, indicating that value for money has improved, although confidence intervals bracket zero. The increase in spending thus appears “worth it” on average, but there remains considerable room for enhancing value for money in care for patients with diabetes.

When one can circle the globe in less than the time of incubation of most infectious pathogens, it is clear every country relies to some extent on the health systems of other countries to prevent and protect their citizens from global health threats. Therefore, creating and maintaining a good health system in one country requires attention to interregional and international cooperation. Domestic and international spheres of public health policies are becoming more intertwined and inseparable.

PUBLISHED: Qiong Zhang, Karen Eggleston (翁笙和), and Michele Barry, 2009. “Pandemic Influenza and the Globalization of Public Health” (流感大流行与公共卫生全球化), Comparative Studies 比较 (42):  (Beijing: China CITIC Press): 47-52.