• 한국병원경영학회지
• /
• 제28권1호
• /
• pp.14-23
• /
• 2023

Purposes: The Specialty hospital designation policy had launched in 2011 and 110 designated specialty hospitals have been operating nationwide in 2022. This study was to estimate the market share of specialty hospitals for the specific diseases compared to other types of hospitals. Methodology: Data were derived from the National Health Insurance Claim data from 2018 to 2019. Subjects were all the inpatients with MDC(Major Disease Category) that specialty hospitals specialized in. A total of 34,231,387 claims were analyzed to estimate the market share. Findings: 90 specialty hospitals were responsible for 2.4 percent of inpatient care with specific diseases for specialty hospitals. There were regional variations in the market share of the specialty hospitals as the number of specialty hospitals in regions. Specialty hospitals' market shares were relatively high in burn(31.3%), ophthalmology(16.4%), obstetrics and gynecology(7.1%), alcohol(6.0%), joint(3.7%), spine(2.7%). After adjusting the number of inpatients per hospital, hospitals specialized in burn, alcohol, ophthalmology, breast, joint, obstetrics and gynecology, and hand replantation had treated more patients than tertiary hospitals. Practical Implications: Although specialty hospitals' market share was small, some types of specialty hospitals had an impact on the regional market as well as the national level market. To improve patients' accessibility to a specialty hospital, it is necessary to government supports non-specialized hospitals to change into specialty hospitals in certain fields and regions where the number of specialty hospitals is insufficient.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제34권1호
• /
• pp.26-37
• /
• 2024

연구배경: 본 연구의 목적은 척추전문병원과 비전문병원의 건당 진료비 및 재원일수 차이를 비교 분석하고, 이에 영향을 미치는 요인을 파악하는 것이다. 방법: 본 연구는 2021년 1월부터 2022년 12월까지의 입원 환자 진료비를 포함한 건강보험심사평가원의 청구 데이터를 사용했다. 의료기관 현황 데이터는 연구대상 병원의 특성을 파악하는 데 사용되었다. 다수준분석을 통해 건당 진료비와 관련된 요인을 파악하고, 포아송 회귀분석을 통해 척추전문병원과 비전문병원 간 재원일수를 분석했다. 분석대상은 척추전문병원 32,015건, 비전문병원 17,555건이었다. 결과: 다빈도 척추 수술 5건 중 4건의 경우, 전문병원이 비전문병원보다 재원일수가 더 긴 것으로 나타났다. 다수준분석 및 포아송 회귀분석 결과, 수술유형에 관계없이 연령이 높고, Charlson comorbidity index 점수가 높을수록 건당 진료비와 재원일수 모두 유의하게 증가하는 것으로 나타났다(p<0.05). 그러나 병원이 대도시에 위치한 경우에는 유의미하게 감소하였다(p<0.05). 결론: 본 연구에서는 기존 연구결과와 달리 전문병원의 건당 진료비와 재원일수가 더 긴 것으로 나타났다. 향후 이러한 차이의 원인을 찾기 위해 추가적인 연구가 필요하다.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제34권1호
• /
• pp.78-86
• /
• 2024

연구배경: 본 연구를 통해 전문병원과 비전문병원에서 인공관절치환술(슬관절)을 받은 입원환자를 대상으로, 전문병원 지정 여부에 따른 입원환자의 의료이용을 비교하여 전문병원제도의 효과성을 파악하고자 한다. 방법: 본 연구는 2021-2022년 건강보험심사평가원(Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service) 요양급여비용 청구자료를 활용하였다. 종속변수는 입원환자의 의료이용으로, 건당 진료비와 재원일수를 선정하였다. 독립변수는 전문병원 지정 여부이며, 통제변수는 환자 단위 변수(연령, 성별, 보험자 유형, 수술 유형 및 Charlson comorbidity index)와 의료기관 단위 변수(설립 구분, 종별 구분, 소재지, 정형외과 의사 수 및 간호사 수)를 선정하였다. 결과: 건당 진료비와 전문병원 지정 여부 간 다중회귀분석 결과, 건당 진료비와 전문병원 지정 여부 간 통계적으로 유의미한 음(-)의 관계가 있었다. 이는 전문병원이 비전문병원에 비해 건당 진료비가 유의하게 낮다는 것을 의미하며, 전문병원과 비전문병원의 입원환자 간 의료이용 결과에 차이가 있음을 시사한다. 결론: 본 연구의 정책적 시사점은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 전문병원 지정기준의 완화가 필요하다. 본 연구결과, 전문병원이 비전문병원에 비해 건당 진료비가 유의하게 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 전문병원의 비용 효과성에도 불구하고 전문병원 지정에 대한 높은 진입장벽으로 인해 수도권 및 대도시 지역에 전문병원이 집중되어 있다. 전문병원의 지역불균형을 해소하기 위해 "준전문병원(가칭)"을 도입하는 등 비수도권 전문병원 지정기준을 완화한다면, 지역간 건강격차 해소 및 의료비 절감의 효과를 불러올 것으로 판단된다. 둘째, 병원 의료인력 규모의 적정성을 판단할 필요가 있다. 본 연구결과, 정형외과 의사 수 및 간호사 수에 따라 건당 진료비에 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 따라서 병원 의료인력 적정 배분을 바탕으로 의료서비스의 비용 효과성을 극대화함으로써 의료비를 절감하는 효과를 불러올 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

• 한국병원경영학회지
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.31-53
• /
• 2006

The objective of this study is to examine the effectiveness of the strategy of hospital specialization by analyzing the differences in expected and perceived services, perceived service quality, satisfaction, and intentions to revisit and recommend the hospital to others between general and specialty hospitals. Data were collected using self-administered questionnaire from patients admitted to four study hospitals: two speciality and two general hospitals. The questionnaire was developed based on SERVQUAL to measure five dimensions of service quality. Four hundreds questionnaires were distributed to inpatients or their guardians and 282 returned questionnaires were used in the analyses. The significance of the differences in study variables between specialty and general hospitals were tested by t-test and $x^2$-test. The factor analysis result confirmed the construct validity of 28 questions asked to measure service quality and resulted in four dimensions of service quality: reliability, assurance, tangible and empathy/responsiveness. Cronbach's Alpha ranged from .9013 to .9358, that confirmed the internal consistency of answers. The study results indicated that patients who used specialty hospitals had higher levels of expected and perceived service, a higher level of perceived service quality, and higher levels of service satisfaction than patients who used general hospitals. Percents of patients who had the intention to revisit the hospital and to recommend the hospital to others were higher among patients in specialty hospitals. The most frequent reason to choose the hospital was the excellence of doctors in both general(29.9%) and specialty(43.8%) hospitals, that was followed by convenient transportation(15.3%) and someone know works at the hospital(15.3%) in general hospitals and other's recommendation(14.6%), and nice amenities(13.1%) in specialty hospitals. Although there were no significant differences in clinical department, age, and sex of patients between general and specialty hospitals, patients who visited speciality hospitals had higher levels of education and income than their counter part in general hospitals. These results suggested that specialty hospitals performed better than general hospitals. Specialization could be a viable strategy to tide over recent financial difficulties experienced by hospitals, particularly small- and medium-sized hospitals.

• 한국병원경영학회지
• /
• 제23권4호
• /
• pp.1-14
• /
• 2018

Purpose : Customers with loyalty are very important to hospitals for sustainable growth in their medical market. Individuals with loyalty are likely to visit same hospital repeatedly when they need medical services. This study was to identify factors associated with selection of specialty hospitals among customers with loyalty. Methods : The subjects of this study were 735 inpatients in 22 specialty hospitals in 6 designated fields(joints, spine, colorectal-anal, obstetrics and gynecology, ophthalmology, otolaryngology). Customer types classified as customers with high loyalty, neutral customers, and customers with low loyalty according to net promoter score(NPS). Factor analysis was conducted to classify 22 hospital selection factors into some similar properties. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to confirm the selection factors related to loyal customers. Findings : Most of specialty hospitals received high NPS of 8 points or higher in all the designated fields. Five factors associated with selection of specialty hospital are (1) hospital facilities and convenience, (2) trust in doctor and hospital, (3) rapidness of treatment, (4) hospital awareness, and (5) accessibility. As a result of logistic regression analysis, selection factors related to loyal customers were 'hospital facilities and convenience', 'trust in doctor and hospital' and 'rapidness of treatment'. Differences in the degree of importance of three selection factors by customer types appeared for each designated field. Practical Implications : This study confirms the high level of patient experience among inpatients of specialty hospitals. Factors associated with selection of hospital among inpatients with loyalty are 'facilities and convenience of hospitals', 'trust of doctor and hospital' and 'rapidness of treatment'. This study will be meaningful as basic data to systematically enhance the roles and functions of the health care system and to provide securing competitiveness according to designated fields in the management aspect of specialty hospitals.

• 한국병원경영학회지
• /
• 제28권2호
• /
• pp.21-31
• /
• 2023

Purposes: Patient experience is a tool to evaluate the process and results of medical services provided by medical institutions from the patient's point of view. Patient satisfaction surveys are a meaningful and essential source of information for improving quality in healthcare organizations. This study aims to provide basic data for improving the quality of medical service that patients can feel by analyzing the recommendation intention and satisfaction of inpatients in specialty hospitals. Methodology: The subjects of this study were 879 inpatients in 28 specialty hospitals in 14 designated fields. We conducted a telephone survey with a structured questionnaire on the satisfaction and recommendation intention for specialty hospitals. Findings: In inpatients, hospital satisfaction was higher in nursing care services and hospital satisfaction was low in physicians care services. The overall patient satisfaction score was 91.4(SD=11.9) out of 100, and the intention of recommendation was 92.0(SD=14.1) out of 100. The factors affecting patient experience were designated fields, sex, age, residential area, monthly household income, and perceived health status. Practical Implications: This study confirmed the high level of patient satisfaction and recommendation intention among inpatients of specialty hospitals. Patient satisfaction can be of great value to healthcare providers in recognizing and improving the quality of care, as well as predicting patients' willingness to revisit medical institutions. This study can be used to improve the quality of hospital care services in specialty hospitals rather than general and tertiary general hospitals.

• 보건의료산업학회지
• /
• 제10권1호
• /
• pp.13-26
• /
• 2016

Objectives : The aim of this study was to investigate whether there is a difference in the factors affecting the financial performance and profitability before and after the specialty hospital designation and thereby identifying the differentiated significance of the financial performance of specialty hospitals. Methods : Based on the year 2011, the analysis period was divided into the pre-specialty hospital designation (2007-2010) and post-specialty hospital designation (2011-2014), and the data were pooled according to the respective analysis period and analyzed by descriptive statistics and regression analysis. Results : The difference in the financial factors that affected the financial performance and profitability before and after the specialty hospital designation was discovered, and a financial performance factor different from prior studies was found. Conclusions : This study identified improved outcomes in financial performance due to the specialty hospital designation and the factors that affect profitability in terms of the finance of specialty hospitals.

• 한국병원경영학회지
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.27-43
• /
• 2010

The present study was conducted to assess relative importance of hospital attributes considered by patients with spinal diseases in choosing specialty or general hospitals. A total of 230 patients hospitalized with spinal diseases in sampled study sites, including 2 specialty and 2 general hospitals, participated in a self-administered questionnaire survey from April 26 through May 8 2007. Patients were asked to rate the degree of agreement on each of the 15 attributes on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 : strongly disagree, 5 : strongly agree) for which they chose the hospital because of that specific attribute. Based on a Factor analysis, the attributes were grouped into 4 : facility and environment, accessibility, interpersonal factor, and credibility. Both patient groups from specialty (mean scale score ; 3.75) and general hospitals (3.62) commonly considered 'credibility' to be the most important attribute, followed by 'facility and environment (3.05 and 3.21).' Logistic regression analysis showed that men(Odds ratio(OR)=0.333) and those with monthly income of $\geq$ 4 million won (OR=0.298) were less likely to choose specialty hospitals. Age groups of 30 to 39 years old (OR=5.140) and $\geq$ 60 years old(OR=4.761), and professionals (OR=5.207) tended to choose specialty hospitals. Patients expressing more importance on 'facility and environment' attribute were less likely to use specialty hospitals (OR=0.571), whereas those emphasizing 'accessibility' were more likely to use specialty hospitals(OR=1.487). The findings of significant difference in patient's demographic characteristics and consideration in hospital attributes would contribute to have a better understanding on patient's choice behaviour and to develop strategy to improve patient's satisfaction.

• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.815-829
• /
• 1996

A physician survey was done by mailing for the purpose of performing hospital services evaluation and ranking. A slightly over one thousand samples were drawn from the list of professional societies, and 324 physicians(about 32 percent) replied. This study has focused on developing easy and simple method to evaluate hospital services, and providing patients with useful information. Hospital service structure and process were evaluated without outcome evaluation, because it is difficult to obtain reliable data regarding health services outcome indicators. Clinical specialty was targeted to evaluate, and three specialties were chosen, that is obstetrics & gynecology, cardiology, and proctology. Among 16 structural indicators, four indicators were finally chosen in each specialty by respondent specialists. And then using these indicators, structural score was calculated for study hospitals. For process evaluation, physicians were requested to nominate five most famous hospitals. The nomination score and structural score were summed up to produce final score and hospital ranking. This method is very easy to conduct rather than other hospital services evaluation methods prevailing in Korea. And it is more useful for patients to choose hospitals, according to his/her own purpose, because it gives high ranking hospitals with specific clinical specialty.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.639-646
• /
• 1999

The dental care delivery system and the dental specialty system have a very close relationship each other. Compared to Korea. Western European countries with predominant public sector in dental service have recognized merely 2 or 3 dental specialties, while North American countries with predominant private sector, 8 or 9 ones. It is desirable to adopt the dental specialty system as soon as possible in Korea to encourage scientific development in various dental specialties and qualitative advance in dental service. We, however, have to establish equitable dental care delivery system which can use limited dental resources efficiently as follows. 1. clarifying the different roles in assignments between general dentists and specialists by the amendment of the related laws such as the Medical Act and establishing the organic patient-referral system. 2. adopting the dental specialty system and expanding personnel and equipments so that the dental college hospitals, especially dental divisions of general hospitals, night function as secondary care facilities with specialties. 3. determining the size of dental specialists according to the national needs for dental specialized service's, whose number is to be not more than 10% of the total dentists. 4. transferring the function of accredating dental specialists to the efficient, self-controlled professional organization such as the Korean Dental Association rather than putting it under the governmental control. 5. conducting a comprehensive review of specialty education and practice for re-recognition, and maintaining competence of specialists by re-accredating them periodically. I expect this article to contribute to further discussion about the dental specialty system in Korea in productive and practical way. I am sure that we can Establish this system in the near future when people in every walks of life-the academic circle, the press, the authority concerned, consumer groups and the Korean Dental Association-take part in the discussion with special concern.