Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Suwandono, A.
Right arrow Articles by Brugha, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Suwandono, A.
Right arrow Articles by Brugha, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Policy and Planning; 16(90002): 10-18
© Oxford University Press 2001

Cost recovery beds in public hospitals in Indonesia

Agus Suwandono1, Ascobat Gani2, Sophia Purwani1, Erik Blas3 and Ruairí Brugha4

1 Center for Health Services/System Research, Ministry of Health, Surabaya, Indonesia,
2 Faculty of Public Health, University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia,
3 UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research and Training (TDR), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland and
4 Health Policy Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK

A policy of allowing public hospitals to provide some better quality, higher priced hospital beds for those able to pay was introduced as government policy in Indonesia after 1993. A study was conducted in 1998 in three public hospitals in East Java to investigate if the policy objective of cost-recovery was being achieved. Hospital revenue from these commercial beds was less than both the recurrent and total costs of providing them in all three hospitals, but exceeded recurrent costs minus staff salaries in two hospitals. One reason for the low cost-recovery ratios was that between 55% and 66% of the revenue was used as staff incentives, mostly to doctors. This was more than the maximum of 40% stipulated in the policy. The high proportions of total revenue going to staff were a result of hospital management having set bed fees too low. The policy may be contributing to the retention of doctors within public sector employment; however, it is not achieving its stated objective, especially over the longer term where full recovery of salaries and investment costs needs to be considered. Public hospitals that wish to invest in commercial beds need effective management and accounting systems so as to be able to monitor and control costs and set fees at levels that recoup the costs incurred. Further research is required to determine if this form of public–private mix has negative effects on equity and access for poorer patients.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Public Health (Oxf)Home page
E. I. Broughton
Economic evaluation of Haemophilus influenzae type B vaccination in Indonesia: a cost-effectiveness analysis
J. Public Health Med., December 1, 2007; 29(4): 441 - 448.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.