Display options
Cite
Bayindir EE, Schreyögg J. What drives different treatment choices? Investigation of hospital ownership, system membership and competition. Health Econ Rev. 2021;11(1):6doi: 10.1186/s13561-021-00305-3.
Bayindir, E. E., & Schreyögg, J. (2021). What drives different treatment choices? Investigation of hospital ownership, system membership and competition. Health economics review, 11(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-021-00305-3
Bayindir, Esra Eren, and Schreyögg, Jonas. "What drives different treatment choices? Investigation of hospital ownership, system membership and competition." Health economics review vol. 11,1 (2021): 6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-021-00305-3
Bayindir EE, Schreyögg J. What drives different treatment choices? Investigation of hospital ownership, system membership and competition. Health Econ Rev. 2021 Feb 16;11(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s13561-021-00305-3. PMID: 33591431; PMCID: PMC7885748.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Health Econ Rev. 2021 Feb 16;11(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s13561-021-00305-3.

What drives different treatment choices? Investigation of hospital ownership, system membership and competition.

Health economics review

Esra Eren Bayindir, Jonas Schreyögg

Affiliations

  1. Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
  2. Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. [email protected].

PMID: 33591431 PMCID: PMC7885748 DOI: 10.1186/s13561-021-00305-3

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Differences in ownership types have attracted considerable interest because of policy implications. Moreover, competition in hospital markets is promoted to reduce health care spending. However, the effects of system membership and competition on treatment choices of hospitals have not been considered in studying hospital ownership types. We examine the treatment choices of hospitals considering ownership types (not-for-profit, for-profit, and government), system membership, patient insurance status (insured, and uninsured) and hospital competition in the United States.

METHODS: We estimate the probability of according the procedure as the treatment employing logistic regression. We consider all procedures accorded at hospitals, controlling for procedure type and diagnosis as well as relevant patient and hospital characteristics. Competition faced by hospitals is measured using a distance-weighted approach separately for procedural groups. Patient records are obtained from State Inpatient Databases for 11 states and hospital characteristics come from American Hospital Association Annual Survey.

RESULTS: Not-for-profit hospitals facing low for-profit competition that are nonmembers of hospital systems, act like government hospitals, whereas not-for-profits facing high for-profit competition and system member not-for-profits facing low for-profit competition are not statistically significantly different from their for-profit counterparts in terms of treatment choices. Uninsured patients are on average 7% less likely to be accorded the procedure as the treatment at system member not-for-profit hospitals facing high for-profit competition than insured patients. System member not-for-profit hospitals, which account for over half of the observations in the analysis, are on average 16% more likely to accord the procedure as the treatment when facing high for-profit competition than low-for-profit competition.

CONCLUSIONS: We show that treatment choices of hospitals differ by system membership and the level of for-profit competition faced by the hospitals in addition to hospital ownership type and health insurance status of patients. Our results support that hospital system member not-for-profits and not-for-profits facing high for-profit competition are for-profits in disguise. Therefore, system membership is an important characteristic to consider in addition to market competitiveness when tax exemption of not-for-profits are revisited. Moreover, higher competition may lead to increasing health care costs due to more aggressive treatment choices, which should be taken into account while regulating hospital markets.

Keywords: Competition; Hospital ownership type; System membership; Treatment choices

References

  1. J. Drucker, J. Silver-Greenberg and S. Kliff, "The New York Times," 25 May 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/25/business/coronavirus-hospitals-bailout.html . Accessed 16 July 2020. - PubMed
  2. Sloan FA. Not-for-profit ownership and hospital behavior. In: Handbook of Health Economics, Volume 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2000. p. 1141–74. - PubMed
  3. Newhouse JP. Toward a theory of nonprofit institutions: an economic model of a hospital. Am Econ Rev. 1970;60:64–74. - PubMed
  4. Weisbrod B. The not-for-profit economy. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; 1988. - PubMed
  5. Pauly MV, Redisch MS. The not-for-profit hospital as a physician's cooperative. Am Econ Rev. 1973;63:87–99. - PubMed
  6. Hirth R. Competition between for-profit and not-for-proit health care providers: can it help achieve social goals? Med Care Res Rev. 1997;54:414–38. - PubMed
  7. Hirth R. Consumer information and competition between not-for-profit and for-profit nursing homes. J Health Econ. 1999;18:219–40. - PubMed
  8. Duggan M. Hospital ownership and public medical spending. Q J Econ. 2000;115:1343–73. - PubMed
  9. Sloan F, Picone G, Taylor D, Chou S. Hospital ownership and cost and quality of care: is there a dime's worth of difference? J Health Econ. 2001;20:1–21. - PubMed
  10. Picone G, Chou S, Sloan F. Are for-profit hospital conversions harmful to patients and to Medicare? RAND J Econ. 2002;33:507–23. - PubMed
  11. Shen Y, Eggleston K, Lau J, Schmid C. Hospital ownership and financial performance: what explains the different findings in the empirical literature? Inquiry. 2007;44:41–68. - PubMed
  12. Danzon P. Hospital 'profits': the effects of reimbursement policies. J Health Econ. 1982;1:29–52. - PubMed
  13. Spika SB, Zweifel P. Buying efficiency: optimal hospital payment in the presence of double upcoding. Heal Econ Rev. 2019;9:38. - PubMed
  14. Dafny L. Games hospitals play: entry deterrence in hospital procedure markets. J Econ Manag Strateg. 2005;14:513–42. - PubMed
  15. Horwitz JR. Making profits and providing care: comparing not-for-profit, for-profit and government hospitals. Health Aff. 2005;24:790–801. - PubMed
  16. Horwitz JR, Nichols A. What do nonprofits maximize? Nonprofit hospital service provision and market ownership mix. In: National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper; 2007. p. 13246. - PubMed
  17. Horwitz J, Nichols A. Hospital ownership medical services: market mix spillover effects, and nonprofit objectives. J Health Econ. 2009;28:924–37. - PubMed
  18. Castaneda MA, Saygili M. The health conditions and the health care consumption of the uninsured. Heal Econ Rev. 2016;6:55. - PubMed
  19. Bayindir EE. Hospital ownership type and treatment choices. J Health Econ. 2012;31(2):359–70. - PubMed
  20. Norton E, Staiger D. How hospital ownership affects access to care for the uninsured. RAND J Econ. 1994;25:171–85. - PubMed
  21. Gruber J. The effects of competitive pressure on charity-hospital response to price shopping in California. J Health Econ. 1994;13:183–212. - PubMed
  22. Duggan M. Hospital market structure and the behavior of not-for-profit hospitals. RAND J Econ. 2002;33:433–46. - PubMed
  23. Silverman E, Skinner J. Medicare upcoding and hospital ownership. J Health Econ. 2004;23:369–89. - PubMed
  24. Morrisey MA, Wedig GJ, Hassan M. Do nonprofit hospitals pay their way? Health Aff. 1996;15:132–44. - PubMed
  25. Capps C, Carlton DW, David G. Antitrust Treatment of Nonprofits: Should Hospitals Receive Special Care? In: NBER working paper; 2017. p. wp23131. - PubMed
  26. Gaynor M, Town R. Competition in Health Care Markets. In: Handbook of Health Economics, Volume 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2012. p. 499–637. - PubMed
  27. Dafny L. Hospital industry consolidation-still more to come? N Engl J Med. 2014;370(3):198–9. - PubMed
  28. Kessler DP, McClellan MB. Is hospital competition socially wasteful? Q J Econ. 2000;115:577–615. - PubMed
  29. Cutler DM, Huckman RS, Kolstad JT. Input constraints and the efficiency of entry: lessons from cardiac surgery. Am Econ J Econ Pol. 2010;2:51–76. - PubMed
  30. Kessler DP, McClellan MB. The effects of hospital ownership on medical productivity. RAND J Econ. 2002;33:488–506. - PubMed
  31. Gowrisankaran G, Town RJ. Competition, payers, and hospital quality. Health Serv Res. 2003;38:1403–21. - PubMed
  32. Mukamel DB, Zwanziger J, Tomaszewski KJ. HMO penetration, competition, and risk-adjusted hospital mortality. Health Serv Res. 2001;36:1019–35. - PubMed
  33. Gaynor M, Moreno-Serra R, Propper C. Death by market power: reform, competition, and patient outcomes in the National Health Service. Am Econ J Econ Pol. 2013;5:134–66. - PubMed
  34. Cooper Z, Gibbons S, Jones S, McGuire A. Does hospital competition save lives? Evidence from the NHS patient choice reforms. Econ J. 2011;121:228–60. - PubMed
  35. Feng Y, Pistollato M, Charlesworth A, Devlin N, Propper C, Sussex J. Association between market concentration of hospitals and patient health gain following hip replacement surgery. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2015;20:11–7. - PubMed
  36. Cooper Z, Gibbons S, Skellern M. Does competition from private surgical centres improve public hospitals'performance? Evidence from the English National Health Service. J Public Econ. 2018;166:63–80. - PubMed
  37. Berta P, Callea G, Martini G, Vittadini G. The effects of upcoding, cream skimming and readmissions on the Italian hospitals efficiency: a population-based investigation. Econ Model. 2010;27:812–21. - PubMed
  38. HCUP State Inpatient Databases (SID). Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/sidoverview.jsp , 2004-2005. Accessed 17 Aug 2020. - PubMed
  39. American Hospital Association Annual Survey., 2004–2005. - PubMed
  40. "Fast Facts on U.S. Hospitals, 2020," American Hospital Association, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.aha.org/statistics/fast-facts-us-hospitals . Accessed 17 Aug 2020. - PubMed
  41. Gaynor M, Propper C, Seiler S. Free to choose? Reform, choice, and consideration sets in the English National Health Service. Am Econ Rev. 2016;106:3521–57. - PubMed
  42. Tsai T, Oray E, Jha A. Patient satisfaction and quality of surgical care in US hospitals. Ann Surg. 2015;261(1):2–8. - PubMed
  43. Karaca-Mandic P, Town R, Wilcock A. The effect of physician and hospital market structure on medical technology diffusion. Health Serv Res. 2017;52(2):579–98. - PubMed
  44. Oldsberg L, Garellick G, Friberg IO, et al. Geographical variations in patient-reported outcomes after total hip arthroplasty between 2008–2012. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):343. - PubMed
  45. Lau Y-S, Harrison M, Sutton M. Association between symptom duration and patient-reported outcomes before and after hip replacement surgery. Arthritis Care Res. 2020;72(3):423–31. - PubMed
  46. Hentschker C, Mennicken R, Schmid A. Defining hospital markets-an application to the German hospital sector. Heal Econ Rev. 2014;4:28. - PubMed
  47. Fisher E, Wennberg D, Stukel T, Gottlieb D, Lucas F, Pinder E. The implications of regional variations in Medicare spending. Part 1: the content, quality, and accessibility of care. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(4):273–87. - PubMed
  48. Fisher E, Wennberg D, Stukel T, Gottlieb D, Lucas F, Pinder E. The implications of regional variations in Medicare spending. Part 2: health outcomes and satisfaction with care. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(4):288–98. - PubMed
  49. Skinner J, Fisher E, Wennberg J. The efficiency of Medicare. In: Analyses in the Economics of Aging. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2005. p. 129–60. - PubMed
  50. Fisher E, Wennberg D, Stukel T, Gottlieb D. Variations in the longitudinal efficiency of academic medical centers. Health Aff. 2004;Suppl Variation:VAR19–32. - PubMed
  51. Horowitz N, Miller A, Rungruang B, Richard S, Rodriguez N, Bookman M, Hamilton C, Krivak T, Maxwell G. Does aggressive surgery improve outcomes? Interaction between preoperative disease burden and complex surgery in patients with advanced-stage ovarian Cancer: an analysis of GOG 182. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(8):937–43. - PubMed
  52. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, e. al. CULPRIT-SHOCK investigators. PCI strategies in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(25):2419–32. - PubMed
  53. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, e. al. CULPRIT-SHOCK investigators. One-year outcomes after PCI strategies in cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(18):1699–710. - PubMed
  54. Khera R, Secemsky E, Wang Y, e. al. Revascularization practices and outcomes in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who presented with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock in the US, 2009-2018. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(10):1317–27. - PubMed
  55. Schlesinger M, Bentkover JD, Blumenthal D, Musacchio R, Willer J. The privatization of health care and physicians' perceptions of access to hospital services. Milkbank Q. 1987;65:25–58. - PubMed
  56. Schlesinger M, Dortwart RD, Hoover C, Epstein S. Competition and access to hospital services: evidence from psychiatric hospitals. Med Care. 1997;35:974–92. - PubMed
  57. Cutler DM, Jill RH. Converting hospitals from not-for-profit to for-profit status: why and what effects? In: The Changing Hospital Industry: Comparing Not-for-profit and For-profit Institutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2000. p. 45–79. - PubMed
  58. Cookson R, Dusheiko M, Hardman G, Martin S. Competition and inequality: evidence from the English National Health Service 1991-2001. J Public Adm Res Theory. 2010:i181–205. - PubMed

Publication Types