Optimal Reimbursement and Malpractice Sharing Rules in Health Care Markets
AbstractWhen health care sponsors such as HMOs or PPOs can use "utilization reviews" in order to indicate to the provider what type of treatment to administer to the patient based upon a diagnosis that is established by the provider, it is possible to implement the "first best" levels of investment in cost control efforts and in aggressiveness of treatment. The implementation of the "first best" requires the utilization of the prospective reimbursement rule accompanied by the removal of all malpractice liabilities from the provider. In contrast, when the type of treatment cannot be enforced by the payer, implementation of the "first best" is not feasible if the payer places a higher weight on the welfare of consumers than that of providers in its objective function. In this case, the reimbursement scheme deviates from the prospective rule, and the provider assumes liability to part of the cost incurred by society as a result of unsuccessful medical outcomes. When the payer can enforce treatment only partially by establishing bounds on the range of acceptable treatments, a minimal acceptable standard will be established and the outcome will be an intermediate case between the above two extremes. Copyright 1999 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
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 Springer in its journal Journal of Regulatory Economics.
Volume (Year): 16 (1999)
Issue (Month): 3 (November)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100298
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Eberhard Feess, 2012. "Malpractice liability, technology choice and negative defensive medicine," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 157-167, April.
- Vislie, Jon, 2009. "Incentive Contracts for Public Health Care Provision under Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard," HERO On line Working Paper Series 2001:6, Oslo University, Health Economics Research Programme.
- Socha, Karolina Z. & Bech, Mickael, 2011. "Physician dual practice: A review of literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 1-7, September.
- Paula González, 2004. "Should physicians' dual practice be limited? An incentive approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(6), pages 505-524.
- Marie Allard & Pierre Thomas Léger & Lise Rochaix, 2004.
"Provider Competition in a Dynamic Setting,"
Cahiers de recherche
04-07, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
- Socha, Karolina, 2010. "Physician dual practice and the public health care provision. Review of the literature," COHERE Working Paper 2010:4, COHERE - Centre of Health Economics Research, University of Southern Denmark.
- Sonja Ossig & Eberhard Feess, 2004. "The impact of liability for malpractice on the optimal reimbursement schemes for health services," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 396, Econometric Society.
- Feess, Eberhard & Ossig, Sonja, 2007. "Reimbursement schemes for hospitals, malpractice liability, and intrinsic motivation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 423-441, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.