Prospective Payment for Medicare Posthospital Services
Some Empirical Considerations
ResearchPublished 1986
Some Empirical Considerations
ResearchPublished 1986
Since the implementation of the prospective payment system (PPS) for Medicare hospital services, attention has turned to extending the principle of prospective payment to posthospital care provided by skilled nursing facilities and home health agencies. The aim behind this extension of the prospective payment system is to provide a financial incentive for the efficient management of an entire episode of patient care — hospital and posthospital. Whether an extended PPS is feasible and whether it would provide the hoped-for benefits can be assessed only through a demonstration of the proposed system. This report details some preliminary analysis of existing data needed to refine the design of the demonstration, to set payment rates for the demonstration, and to make sure that neither a demonstration nor a fully implemented extended PPS will expose beneficiaries or providers to unacceptable risks. An earlier RAND report, R-3335, describes in detail how an extended PPS would operate and how a demonstration would be structured.
This publication is part of the RAND report series. The report series, a product of RAND from 1948 to 1993, represented the principal publication documenting and transmitting RAND's major research findings and final research.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.