The introduction of technology aimed at reducing the response times of emergency medical services has been one of the principal innovations in crisis care over the last several decades. These substantial investments have typically been justified by an assumed link between shorter response times and improved health outcomes. But, current medical research does not actually show a significant relationship between response time and mortality. In this study, I explain the discrepancy between conventional wisdom and current medical research; existing research fails to account for the endogeneity of incident severity and response time. Analyzing detailed call-level information from the state of Utah's Bureau of Emergency Medical Services, I measure the impact of response time on mortality and hospital utilization using the distance of the incident from the nearest EMS agency headquarters as an instrument for response time. I find that response times significantly affect mortality, but not hospital utilization. A cost benefit analysis suggests that the anticipated benefits of a response time reduction exceed the costs and I discuss free-rider problems that might be responsible for the inefficiently high response times I observe.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section. in its series Working Papers with number
1065.
Find related papers by JEL classification: I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Production I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS 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.:
David M. Cutler & Ellen Meara, 2000.
"The Technology of Birth: Is It Worth It?,"
NBER Chapters,
in: Frontiers in Health Policy Research, Volume 3, pages 33-68
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!]