Norwegian priority guidelines: Estimating the distributional implications across age, gender and SES
AbstractObjective Targeting hospital treatment at patients with high priority would seem to be a natural policy response to the growing gap between what can be done and what can be financed in the specialist health care sector. The paper examines the distributional consequences of this policy.Method 450Â 000 elective patients are allocated to priority groups on the basis of medical guidelines developed by one of the regional health authorities in Norway. Probit models are estimated explaining priority status as a function of age, gender and socioeconomic status.Results Women and older people are overrepresented among patients with low priority. Conditional on age, women with low priority have lower income and less education than women with high priority. Among men below 50 years, patients with low priority have less education than patients with high priority.Conclusion Targeting hospital treatment at patients with high priority, though sensible from a pure medical perspective, may have undesirable distributional consequences.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Health Policy.
Volume (Year): 95 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2-3 (May)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol
Prioritization Elective treatment Socioeconomic status Distribution;
Other versions of this item:
- Carlsen, Fredrik & Kaarbøe, Oddvar, 2009. "Norwegian priority guidelines: Estimating the distributional implications across age, gender and SES," Working Papers in Economics 08/09, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
- I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
- I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Hugh Gravelle & Luigi Siciliani, 2006.
"Is Waiting-time Prioritisation Welfare Improving?,"
06/13, Department of Economics, University of York.
- Biørn, Erik & Hagen, Terje P. & Iversen, Tor & Magnussen, Jon, 2009.
"The effect of activity-based financing on hospital efficiency: A panel data analysis of DEA efficiency scores 1992-2000,"
HERO On line Working Paper Series
2002:8, Oslo University, Health Economics Research Programme.
- Biorn, Erik & Hagen, Terje P. & Iversen, Tor & Magnussen, Jon, 2002. "The Effect of Activity-Based Financing on Hospital Efficiency: A Panel Data Analysis of DEA Efficiency Scores 1992-2000," MPRA Paper 8099, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Luigi Siciliani & Rossella Verzulli, 2009. "Waiting times and socioeconomic status among elderly Europeans: evidence from SHARE," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(11), pages 1295-1306.
- Hagen, Terje P. & Kaarboe, Oddvar M., 2006. "The Norwegian hospital reform of 2002: Central government takes over ownership of public hospitals," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 320-333, May.
- Magnussen, Jon & Hagen, Terje P. & Kaarbøe, Oddvar M., 2006.
"Centralized or decentralized? A case study of Norwegian hospital reform,"
Working Papers in Economics
02/06, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
- Magnussen, Jon & Hagen, Terje P. & Kaarboe, Oddvar M., 2007. "Centralized or decentralized? A case study of Norwegian hospital reform," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(10), pages 2129-2137, May.
- Iversen, Tor & Kopperud, Gry Stine, 2009.
"Regulation versus practice - The impact of accessibility on the use of specialist health care in Norway,"
HERO On line Working Paper Series
2005:2, Oslo University, Health Economics Research Programme.
- Tor Iversen & Gry Stine Kopperud, 2005. "Regulation versus practice - the impact of accessibility on the use of specialist health care in Norway," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(12), pages 1231-1238.
- Siciliani, Luigi & Hurst, Jeremy, 2005. "Tackling excessive waiting times for elective surgery: a comparative analysis of policies in 12 OECD countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 201-215, May.
- Carlsen, Fredrik & Kaarbøe, Oddvar Martin, 2010.
"Waiting times and socioeconomic status. Evidence from Norway,"
Working Papers in Economics
08/10, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
- Oddvar Kaarboe & Fredrik Carlsen, 2014. "Waiting Times And Socioeconomic Status. Evidence From Norway," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(1), pages 93-107, 01.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei) or () The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask to update the entry or send us the correct address.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.