IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v88y2008i1p121-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Financial incentives do not always work--An example of cesarean sections in Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • Lo, Joan C.

Abstract

Objectives To test the hypothesis that cesarean sections are less likely to be performed after equalizing the fees for vaginal births and cesarean sections.Methods Population-based National Health Insurance inpatient claims in Taiwan are used. Pre-periods and post-periods are identified to investigate the impact of the policy changes. Logistic regressions are employed.Results The cesarean section rates for the first, second and higher-order births are 29, 37.4 and 39.3%, while the primary cesarean section rates are 29, 11.8 and 12.1%, respectively. After taking into consideration the case-mix and birth order, the second and higher-order births were approximately 60% less likely to be cesarean deliveries compared to the first births and the increase in the VBAC fee had an additional negative effect on them. A fee equalization policy was not found to influence the cesarean delivery. The total cesarean section rate was primarily determined by the cesarean section rate for the first birth.Conclusions Cesarean section rates are greater for the higher-order births because of the practice "once a cesarean section, always a cesarean section". Against the background of a rapidly declining fertility rate, females play a more important role in the mode of delivery than ever before. As such, financial incentives designed specifically for obstetricians do not have the desired impact. Policies that are aimed at altering behavior should be designed within the social context.

Suggested Citation

  • Lo, Joan C., 2008. "Financial incentives do not always work--An example of cesarean sections in Taiwan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 121-129, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:88:y:2008:i:1:p:121-129
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(08)00058-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lo, Joan C., 2003. "Patients' attitudes vs. physicians' determination: implications for cesarean sections," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 91-96, July.
    2. Placek, P.J. & Taffel, S. & Moien, M., 1983. "Cesarean section delivery rates: United States, 1981," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 73(8), pages 861-862.
    3. Jonathan Gruber & Maria Owings, 1996. "Physician Financial Incentives and Cesarean Section Delivery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 99-123, Spring.
    4. Stafford, R.S., 1990. "Cesarean section use and source of payment: An analysis of California hospital discharge abstracts," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 80(3), pages 313-315.
    5. Brown, H. III, 1996. "Physician demand for leisure: implications for cesarean section rates," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 233-242, April.
    6. Gruber, Jon & Kim, John & Mayzlin, Dina, 1999. "Physician fees and procedure intensity: the case of cesarean delivery," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 473-490, August.
    7. Dubay, Lisa & Kaestner, Robert & Waidmann, Timothy, 1999. "The impact of malpractice fears on cesarean section rates," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 491-522, August.
    8. Bertollini, R. & DiLallo, D. & Spadea, T. & Perucci, C., 1992. "Cesarean section rates in Italy by hospital payment mode: An analysis based on birth certificates," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 82(2), pages 257-261.
    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. Barili, Emilia & Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica, 2021. "Fee equalization and appropriate health care," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García-Prado, 2012. "Non-elective cesarean sections in public hospitals: hospital capacity constraints and doctor´s incentives," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 1212, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    3. Kim, Seung Ju & Han, Kyu-Tae & Kim, Sun Jung & Park, Eun-Cheol & Park, Hye Ki, 2016. "Impact of a diagnosis-related group payment system on cesarean section in Korea," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(6), pages 596-603.
    4. Barili, E; & Bertoli, P; & Grembi, V;, 2020. "Title: Fees equalization and Appropriate Health Care," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 20/09, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    5. Jimena Soledad Ferraro & Alan Acosta & Khare Shagun, 2021. "Physician convenience and cesarean section delivery," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4469, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    6. Yu, Serena & Fiebig, Denzil G. & Viney, Rosalie & Scarf, Vanessa & Homer, Caroline, 2022. "Private provider incentives in health care: The case of caesarean births," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 294(C).
    7. Ke-Zong Ma & Edward Norton & Shoou-Yih Lee, 2011. "Mind the information gap: fertility rate and use of cesarean delivery and tocolytic hospitalizations in Taiwan," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Arrieta, Alejandro, 2011. "Health reform and cesarean sections in the private sector: The experience of Peru," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 124-130, February.
    9. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García Prado, 2016. "Non-elective C-sections in public hospitals: capacity constraints and doctor incentives," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(49), pages 4719-4731, October.
    10. Aleksandr Proshin & Alexandre Cazenave-Lacroutz & Zeynep Or & Lise Rochaix, 2018. "Impact of Diagnosis Related Group Refinement on the Choice Between Scheduled Caesarean Section and Normal Delivery: Recent Evidence from France," Working Papers halshs-01812107, HAL.
    11. Alex Proshin & Alexandre Cazenave‐Lacroutz & Lise Rochaix, 2023. "Impact of tariff refinement on the choice between scheduled C‐section and normal delivery: Evidence from France," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(7), pages 1397-1433, July.

    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. Aleksandr Proshin & Alexandre Cazenave-Lacroutz & Zeynep Or & Lise Rochaix, 2018. "Impact of Diagnosis Related Group Refinement on the Choice Between Scheduled Caesarean Section and Normal Delivery: Recent Evidence from France," PSE Working Papers halshs-01812107, HAL.
    2. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García Prado, 2016. "Non-elective C-sections in public hospitals: capacity constraints and doctor incentives," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(49), pages 4719-4731, October.
    3. Daniele Fabbri & Chiara Monfardini, 2008. "Style of practice and assortative mating: a recursive probit analysis of Caesarean section scheduling in Italy," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(11), pages 1411-1423.
    4. De Luca, Giacomo & Lisi, Domenico & Martorana, Marco & Siciliani, Luigi, 2021. "Does higher Institutional Quality improve the Appropriateness of Healthcare Provision?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    5. Francese, Maura & Piacenza, Massimiliano & Romanelli, Marzia & Turati, Gilberto, 2014. "Understanding inappropriateness in health spending: The role of regional policies and institutions in caesarean deliveries," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 262-277.
    6. Ke-Zong Ma & Edward Norton & Shoou-Yih Lee, 2011. "Mind the information gap: fertility rate and use of cesarean delivery and tocolytic hospitalizations in Taiwan," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-15, December.
    7. Karen Norberg & Juan Pantano, 2016. "Cesarean sections and subsequent fertility," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 5-37, January.
    8. Carine Milcent & Saad Zbiri, 2022. "Supplementary private health insurance: The impact of physician financial incentives on medical practice," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 57-72, January.
    9. Karen Norberg & Juan Pantano, 2016. "Cesarean sections and subsequent fertility," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 5-37, January.
    10. Barili, Emilia & Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica, 2021. "Fee equalization and appropriate health care," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    11. Halla, Martin & Mayr, Harald & Pruckner, Gerald J. & García-Gómez, Pilar, 2020. "Cutting fertility? Effects of cesarean deliveries on subsequent fertility and maternal labor supply," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    12. Guccio, C. & Lisi, D., 2014. "Social interactions in inappropriate behavior for childbirth services: Theory and evidence from the Italian hospital sector," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 14/28, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    13. Grant, Darren, 2022. "The “Quiet Revolution” and the cesarean section in the United States," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    14. Carine Milcent & Julie Rochut, 2009. "Tarification hospitalière et pratique médicale. La pratique de la césarienne en France," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 60(2), pages 489-506.
    15. de Elejalde, Ramiro & Giolito, Eugenio, 2021. "A demand-smoothing incentive for cesarean deliveries," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    16. Graham Cookson & Ioannis Laliotis, 2018. "Promoting normal birth and reducing caesarean section rates: An evaluation of the Rapid Improvement Programme," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 675-689, April.
    17. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García-Prado, 2012. "Non-elective cesarean sections in public hospitals: hospital capacity constraints and doctor´s incentives," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 1212, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    18. Jensen, Vibeke Myrup & Wüst, Miriam, 2015. "Can Caesarean section improve child and maternal health? The case of breech babies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 289-302.
    19. Jimena Soledad Ferraro & Alan Acosta & Khare Shagun, 2021. "Physician convenience and cesarean section delivery," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4469, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    20. Sofia Amaral-Garcia & Paola Bertoli & Veronica Grembi, 2015. "Does Experience Rating Improve Obstetric Practices? Evidence From Geographical Discontinuities in Italy," CEIS Research Paper 342, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 08 May 2015.

    More about this item

    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:eee:hepoli:v:88:y:2008:i:1:p:121-129. 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: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    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.