The effect of differential eligibility for free GP services on GP utilisation in Ireland
Internationally, there is extensive empirical evidence that a strong primary care-led health system is associated with improved health outcomes, increased quality of care, decreased health inequalities and lower overall health-care costs. Within primary care, factors influencing access to, and utilisation of, general practitioner (GP) services have been widely examined and this paper focuses on the role of user financial incentives. In particular, user charges for health care have been observed to deter health-care utilisation. Relative to other countries, the Irish health-care system is unusual in that the majority of the population are required to pay out-of-pocket for GP care. However, in 2005 the Irish government extended eligibility for free GP care to a further small subset of the population. Using micro-data from a nationally representative survey of the population in 2007, this paper analyses the impact of differential coverage of free GP services on GP utilisation in Ireland. Results from multivariate regression analysis indicate that GP utilisation is significantly more likely in the context of free GP care, controlling for a range of demographic, socio-economic and health factors. Interpretation of the results for the new category of coverage is complicated by possible pent-up demand and selection effects.
If 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.
Volume (Year): 74 (2012)
Issue (Month): 10 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
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.:
- Starfield, Barbara & Shi, Leiyu, 2002. "Policy relevant determinants of health: an international perspective," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 201-218, June.
- Sara Allin & Jeremiah Hurley, 2009.
"Inequity in publicly funded physician care: what is the role of private prescription drug insurance?,"
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(10), pages 1218-1232.
- Sara Allin & Jeremiah Hurley, 2008. "Inequity in Publicly Funded Physician Care: What Is The Role Of Private Prescription Drug Insurance?," Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series 2008-02, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
- Layte, Richard & Nolan, Anne & McGee, Hannah & O'Hanlon, Ann, 2009. "Do consultation charges deter general practitioner use among older people? A natural experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1432-1438, April.
- Mark Stabile, 2001. "Private insurance subsidies and public health care markets: evidence from Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(4), pages 921-942, November.
- Samantha Smith, 2010. "The Irish ‘health basket’: a basket case?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(3), pages 343-350, June.
- Deininger, Klaus & Mpuga, Paul, 2004. "Economic and Welfare Effects of the Abolition of Health User Fees : Evidence from Uganda," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3276, The World Bank.
- Cumming, Jacqueline & Mays, Nicholas, 2011. "New Zealand’s Primary Health Care Strategy: early effects of the new financing and payment system for general practice and future challenges," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(01), pages 1-21, January. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:74:y:2012:i:10:p:1644-1651. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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.