Abstract:Objective To explore the significance of pay-per-disease reform by analyzing the medical quality and safety, hospitalization expenses and settlement cost between the internal fixation removal of lumbar fracture patients with pay-per-disease based on clinical path and patients without pay-per-disease. Methods One hundred and thirty-four internal fixation removal of lumbar fracture patients were selected. Among them, patients with pay-per-disease were set as the single-disease group, while patients without pay-per-disease were set as the control group, and the medical quality and safety, hospitalization expenses and settlement cost were analyzed. Results In terms of medical quality and safety, there were no significant differences in the incidence of complications and mortality, and other indicators were significantly different between the single-disease group and the control group. In terms of hospitalization expenses, there were no significant differences in medical income and the proportion of examination income, and other indicators were significantly different between two groups. In terms of hospitalization settlement cost, there were significant differences in the reimbursement and self-payment. Conclusion The use of pay-per-disease based on clinical path can effectively save health resources, improve the quality of medical services, reduce the economic burden of patients, relieve the pressure on medical insurance funds, and achieve the goal of multiwin.