This paper empirically investigates the impact of additional reimbursement instruments on the diffusion of new technologies in inpatient care. Using 2010–2014 German panel data on hospital level for every patient undergoing coronary angioplasty, this study examines the utilisation of drug-eluting balloon catheters (DEB) over time while additional payment instruments changed. Hypothesising that the utilisation of DEB increased abruptly when a new reimbursement instrument came into force, we estimate a fixed effects regression comparing years with a change and years where the reimbursement instrument remained the same. The model is adjusted for patient age and severity of the disease. The utilisation of DEB increased from 8407 in 2010 to 19,065 in 2014. Hospitals used significantly more DEB when an additional payment instrument changed compared to years when it remained the same. The increase was roughly twice as large. In short, hospitals are incentivised to utilise new technologies if the reimbursement changes to an instrument that is designed in a more reliable way, e.g. including less bureaucracy or guaranteeing fixed prices.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
DRG payment rates are calculated by multiplying the respective cost weight of a DRG with the national 2014 average base rate of 3156.82 euros, which in reality differed among the 16 federal states ranging from 1113 and 3325 euros.
Barnum, H., Kutzin, J., Saxenian, H.: Incentives and provider payment methods. Int J. Health Plann. Manag. 10(1), 23–45 (1995)
McCullough, J.S.: The adoption of hospital information systems. Health Econ. 17(5), 649–664 (2008)
Pirson, M., Schenker, L., Martins, D., Dung, D., Chalé, J.J., Lecrercq, P.: What can we learn from international comparisons of costs by DRG? Eur. J. Health Econ. 14(1), 67–73 (2013)
Hernandez, J., Machacz, S.F., Robinson, J.C.: US hospital payment adjustments for innovative technology lag behind those in Germany, France, and Japan. Health Aff. (Millwood) 34(2), 261–270 (2015)
Kesteloot, K., Voet, N.: Incentives for cooperation in quality improvement among hospitals? The impact of the reimbursement system. J. Health Econ. 17(6), 701–728 (1998)
Lee, R.H., Waldman, D.M.: The diffusion of innovations in hospitals. Some econometric considerations. J. Health Econ. 4(4), 373–380 (1985)
Scheller-Kreinsen, D., Quentin, W., Busse, R.: DRG-based hospital payment systems and technological innovation in 12 European countries. Value Health 14(8), 1166–1172 (2011)
Bech, M., Christiansen, T., Dunham, K., Lauridsen, J., Lyttkens, C.H., McDonald, K., McGuire, A.: The influence of economic incentives and regulatory factors on the adoption of treatment technologies: a case study of technologies used to treat heart attacks. Health Econ. 18(10), 1114–1132 (2009)
Cappellaro, G., Ghislandi, S., Anessi-Pessina, E.: Diffusion of medical technology: the role of financing. Health Policy 100(1), 51–59 (2011)
Cutler, D.M., Huckman, R.S.: Technological development and medical productivity: the diffusion of angioplasty in New York State. J. Health Econ. 22(2), 187–217 (2003)
Romeo, A.A., Wagner, J.L., Lee, R.H.: Prospective reimbursement and the diffusion of new technologies in hospitals. J. Health Econ. 3(1), 1–24 (1984)
Sloan, F.A., Valvona, J., Perrin, J.M., Adamache, K.W.: Diffusion of surgical technology. An exploratory study. J. Health Econ. 5(1), 31–61 (1986)
Cots, F., Chiarello, P., Salvador, X., Castells, X., Quentin, W.: DRG-based hospital payment: intended and unintended consequences. In: Busse, R., Geissler, A., Quentin, W., Wiley, M. (eds.) Diagnosis-related groups in Europe. Moving towards transparency, efficiency and quality in hospitals, pp. 75–92. Open University Press, Maidenhead (2011)
Farrar, S., Yi, D., Sutton, M., Chalkley, M., Sussex, J., Scott, A.: Has payment by results affected the way that English hospitals provide care? Difference-in-differences analysis. BMJ 339(7720), 554–556 (2009)
Bäumler, M.: Which non-clinical factors influence the use of innovative implants? The example of drug-releasing coronary stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a multilevel regression analysis. Das Gesundheitswesen 75(12), 822–831 (2013)
Sorenson, C., Drummond, M., Wilkinson, G.: Use of innovation payments to encourage the adoption of new medical technologies in the English NHS. Health Policy Technol. 2(3), 168–173 (2013)
Busse, R., Ganten, D., Huster, S., Reinhardt. ER,, Suttorp, N., Wiesing, U.: Zum Verhältnis von Medizin und Ökonomie im deutschen Gesundheitssystem: 8 Thesen zur Weiterentwicklung zum Wohle der Patienten und der Gesellschaft. Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina e.V. https://www.leopoldina.org/uploads/tx_leopublication/Leo_Diskussion_Medizin_und_Oekonomie_2016.pdf (2016). Accessed 08 June 2018
Weiner, S.L., Maxwell, J.H., Sapolsky, H.M., Dunn, D.L., Hsiao, W.C.: Economic incentives and organizational realities: managing hospitals under DRGs. Milbank Q. 65(4), 463–487 (1987)
Laffont, J.J., Martimort, D.: The theory of incentives: the principal-agent model. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2002)
Hall, B.H., Khan, B.: Adoption of New Technology. NBER Working Paper No. 9730. https://www.nber.org/papers/w9730.pdf (2003). Accessed 08 June 2018
Smith, A.: The wealth of nations. The Modern Library, New York (1776)
Barnard, C.I., Andrews, K.R.: The functions of the executive. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1938)
Baker, L.: Managed care and technology adoption in health care: evidence from magnetic resonance imaging. J. Health Econ. 20(3), 395–421 (2000)
Clyde, A.T., Bockstedt, L., Farkas, J.A., Jackson, C.: Experience with Medicare’s new technology add-on payment program. Health Aff. (Millwood) 27(6), 1632–1641 (2008)
Sorenson, C., Drummond, M., Torbica, A., Callea, G., Mateus, C.: The role of hospital payments in the adoption of new medical technologies: an international survey of current practice. Health Econ. Policy Law 10(2), 133–159 (2015)
Schreyögg, J., Stargardt, T., Tiemann, O., Busse, R.: Methods to determine reimbursement rates for diagnosis related groups (DRG): a comparison of nine European countries. Health Care Manag. Sci. 9(3), 215–223 (2006)
Ex, P., Vogt, V., Busse, R., Henschke, C.: The Reimbursement of New Medical Technologies in the German inpatient sector: what factors explain which hospitals receive innovation payments? HealthEcon, Pol, Law (2019)
Henschke, C., Bäumler, M., Weid, S., Gaskins, M., Busse, R.: Extrabudgetary (‘NUB’) payments: a gateway for introducing new medical devices into the German inpatient reimbursement system? J. Manag. Marketing Healthc 3(2), 119–133 (2010)
Gruntzig, A.: Transluminal dilatation of coronary–artery stenosis. Lancet 1(8058), 263 (1978)
Mark, D.B., Nelson, C.L., Califf, R.M., Harrell, F.E., Lee, K.L., Jones, R.H., Fortin, D.F., Stack, R.S., Glower, D.D., Smith, L.R., et al.: Continuing evolution of therapy for coronary artery disease. Initial results from the era of coronary angioplasty. Circulation 89(5), 2015–2025 (1994)
Byrne, R.A., Joner, M., Alfonso, F., Kastrati, A.: Drug-coated balloon therapy in coronary and peripheral artery disease. Nat Rev Cardiol 11(1), 13–23 (2014)
GBD 2013 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators: Global, regional, and national age–sex specific all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 240 causes of death, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet 385(9963), 117–171 (2015)
OECD: Focus on Health Spending. Expenditure by disease, age and gender. http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/Expenditure-by-disease-age-and-gender-FOCUS-April2016.pdf (2016). Accessed 08 June 2018
Wooldridge, J.M.: Introductory Econometrics: A modern approach, 5th edn. South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason (2013)
Mitchell, M.N.: Interpreting and visualizing regression models using Stata. Stata Press, College Station (2012)
Afshartous, D., Preston, R.: Key results of interaction models with centering. J. Stat. Educ. 19(3), 1–24 (2011)
Robinson, C., Randall, S.: Interaction effect. Centering, variance inflation factor, and interpretation issues. Mult Linear Regres Viewp 35(1), 6–11 (2009)
Rabe-Hesketh, S., Skrondal, A.: Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using stata, 3rd edn. Stata Press, College Station (2012)
Adler-Milstein, J., Everson, J., Lee, S.Y.: EHR adoption and hospital performance: time-related effects. Health Serv. Res. 50(6), 1751–1771 (2015)
Mabotuwana, T., Hall, C.S., Flacke, S., Thomas, S., Wald, C.: Inpatient complexity in radiology—a practical application of the case mix index metric. J. Digit. Imaging 30(3), 301–308 (2017)
Cameron, A.C., Trivedi, P.K.: Microeconometrics using Stata, revised. Stata Press, College Station (2010)
Giesselmann, M., Windzio, M.: Regressionsmodelle zur Analyse von Paneldaten. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden (2012)
Wooldridge, J.M.: Testing heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation in a fixed effects panel regression. https://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2011-03/msg00089.html (2011). Accessed 08 June 2018
Gould, W.: R-squared in panel data models. https://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2003-05/msg00336.html (2003). Accessed 08 June 2018
Torres-Reyna, O.: Panel Data Analysis. Fixed and Random Effects using Stata (2007). https://www.princeton.edu/~otorres/Panel101.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2018
Knol, M.J., Pestman, W.R., Grobbee, D.E.: The (mis)use of overlap of confidence intervals to assess effect modification. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 26(4), 253–254 (2011)
Jönsson, B.: Disruptive innovation and EU health policy. Eur. J. Health Econ. 18(3), 269–272 (2017)
Brüderl, J.: Applied Panel Data Analysis. Using Stata. http://www.ls3.soziologie.uni-muenchen.de/studium-lehre/archiv/teaching-marterials/panelanalysis-bruederl.pdf (2015). Accessed 08 June 2018
Lamiraud, K., Lhuillery, S.: Endogenous technology adoption and medical costs. Health Econ. 25(9), 1123–1147 (2016)
Wijns, W.: ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur. Heart J. 31, 2501–2555 (2010)
Windecker, S.: ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardinal revascularization. Eur. Heart J. 25, 2541–2619 (2014)
Henschke, C., Bäumler, M., Weid, S., Busse, R.: Extrabudgetary (‘NUB’) payments: a gateway for introducing new medical devices into the German inpatient reimbursement system? J. Manag. Marketing Healthc. 3(2), 119–133 (2010)
Dafny, L.S.: How do hospitals respond to price changes? Am. Econ. Rev. 95(5), 1525–1547 (2005)
The project was funded through the Berlin Centre for Health Economics Research by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Grant No. 01EH1604A). Patricia Ex received a scholarship from Cusanuswerk, the episcopal scholarship foundation.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Ex, P., Henschke, C. Changing payment instruments and the utilisation of new medical technologies. Eur J Health Econ 20, 1029–1039 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-019-01056-z
- Additional payment instruments
- Diffusion of innovations
- New health technology
- Hospital financing
- DRG system
- Panel data