IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uea/ueaccp/2013_13.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Hospital Procurement with Concentrated Sellers: A Case Study of Hip Prostheses

Author

Listed:
  • Charlotte Davies

    (Centre for Competition Policy and Health Economics Group, University of East Anglia)

  • Paula Lorgelly

    (Centre for Health Economics, Monash University)

Abstract

Procurement within the NHS is attracting increasing research and policy interest. However, most of the emphasis has been on the buyer (the NHS), with less attention paid to the behaviour of suppliers (often pharmaceutical companies). For medical devices very little is publicly documented about procurement and even less about the supplying industry. This paper uses a case study of artificial hip prostheses to indirectly explore how procurement choices are made within the NHS. We recognise the roles of the various players (patient, surgeon and hospital procurement department) when purchases are made from a potentially highly oligopolistic supplying industry. Using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales, we show that the supplying industry is indeed highly oligopolistic, with the potential for the exercise of market seller power. At the national level the NHS as a whole purchases from the equivalent of just four large sellers. However, typically individual hospitals are buying from only two, or in some instances one seller. Given this backdrop, we develop a theoretical framework explaining prosthesis choice, considering the roles and preferences of the patient, surgeon, hospital and supplier. This provides a set of hypotheses tested using an econometric model in which the diversity of prosthesis choice at the hospital level is explained by a vector of patient and hospital characteristics. This reveals little evidence that patient heterogeneity is a major determinant of diversity of procurement choices. More important are hospital size (which will be related to the number of surgeons), status of the hospital, recent NHS reforms and the potential role of the supplier. These findings provide a basis for future survey analysis of surgeons and hospital procurement departments designed to discover more directly how decisions are made and how suppliers bargain with hospitals.

Suggested Citation

  • Charlotte Davies & Paula Lorgelly, 2013. "Hospital Procurement with Concentrated Sellers: A Case Study of Hip Prostheses," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2013-13, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
  • Handle: RePEc:uea:ueaccp:2013_13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ueaeco.github.io/working-papers/papers/ccp/CCP-13-13.pdf
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zack Cooper & Steve Gibbons & Simon Jones & Alistair McGuire, 2010. "Does Hospital Competition Improve Efficiency? An Analysis of the Recent Market-Based Reforms to the English NHS," CEP Discussion Papers dp0988, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    2. Matthew Grennan, 2013. "Price Discrimination and Bargaining: Empirical Evidence from Medical Devices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 145-177, February.
    3. Davies, Stephen & Lyons, Bruce, 1996. "Industrial Organization in the European Union: Structure, Strategy, and the Competitive Mechanism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198289739.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Papanicolas, Irene & McGuire, Alistair, 2015. "Do financial incentives trump clinical guidance? Hip Replacement in England and Scotland," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 25-36.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wettstein, Dominik J. & Boes, Stefan, 2022. "How value-based policy interventions influence price negotiations for new medicines: An experimental approach and initial evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 112-121.
    2. Michael Peneder, 2003. "Industry Classifications: Aim, Scope and Techniques," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 109-129, March.
    3. Donna, Javier D. & Pereira, Pedro & Trindade, Andre & Yoshida, Renan C., 2020. "Direct-to-Consumer Sales by Manufacturers and Bargaining," MPRA Paper 105773, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Aidan Hollis, 2003. "Industrial Concentration, Output, and Trade: An Empirical Exploration," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 22(2), pages 103-119, March.
    5. Wolfgang Keller, 2002. "Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 120-142, March.
    6. Chen, Natalie, 2004. "The behaviour of relative prices in the European Union: A sectoral analysis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1257-1286, December.
    7. Shohei Yoshida, 2018. "Bargaining power and firm profits in asymmetric duopoly: an inverted-U relationship," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 124(2), pages 139-158, June.
    8. Walter Beckert, 2018. "An Empirical Analysis of Countervailing Power in Business-to-Business Bargaining," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 52(3), pages 369-402, May.
    9. Johannes Münster & Markus Reisinger, 2021. "Sequencing Bilateral Negotiations with Externalities," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 096, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    10. MANTOVANI Andrea & VANCAUTEREN Mark, 2010. "The Harmonization of Technical Barriers to Trade, Innovation and Export Behavior: Theory with an Application to EU Environmental Regulations," EcoMod2003 330700094, EcoMod.
    11. Marie-Laure Allain & Rémi Avignon & Claire Chambolle & Hugo Molina, 2022. "Buying groups formation: what effects on competition in the retail industry? [Les centrales d’achat : quels enjeux de concurrence ?]," Post-Print halshs-03693375, HAL.
    12. Harborne W. Stuart, 2016. "Value Gaps and Profitability," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 56-70, March.
    13. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2008. "International Trade Integration: A Disaggregated Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 7103, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Takanori Adachi & Noriaki Matsushima, 2014. "The Welfare Effects Of Third-Degree Price Discrimination In A Differentiated Oligopoly," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(3), pages 1231-1244, July.
    15. Daniel McFadden & Carlos Noton & Pau Olivella, "undated". "Remedies for Sick Insurance," Working Papers 620, Barcelona School of Economics.
    16. Jan Guldager JØrgensen & Philipp J.H. Schr–der, 2003. "Reductions in Real versus Tariff Barriers: The Impact on Industry Concentration," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 251-268, December.
    17. Kate Ho & Robin S. Lee, 2017. "Insurer Competition in Health Care Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 379-417, March.
    18. Amaral-Garcia, S.;, 2022. "Medical Device Companies and Doctors: Do their interactions affect medical treatments?," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 22/10, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. Pierre Dubois & Morten Sæthre, 2020. "On the Effect of Parallel Trade on Manufacturers' and Retailers' Profits in the Pharmaceutical Sector," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(6), pages 2503-2545, November.
    20. Matthew Backus & Thomas Blakee & Brad Larsen & Steven Tadelis, 2020. "Sequential Bargaining in the Field: Evidence from Millions of Online Bargaining Interactions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(3), pages 1319-1361.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Medical devices; competition; concentration; diversification; oligopoly; buyer power;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uea:ueaccp:2013_13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Juliette Hardmad (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esueauk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.