IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/apeclt/v12y2005i1p7-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is there 'patient selection' in the demand for private maternity care in Greece?

Author

Listed:
  • Elias Mossialos
  • Joan Costa-Font
  • Konstantina Davaki
  • Konstantinos Karras

Abstract

The influence of private health insurance (PHI) and gynaecologists' demand for leisure in determining a caesarean section (CS) delivery is examined. A database collected in January 2002 is exploited which contains records on women who attended the second largest private hospital in Greece. A joint maximum-likelihood probit estimation for the PHI subscription and the decision to undertake CS is employed. Results suggest that the obstetrician's decision to undertake CS is not independent of the women having PHI coverage. The probability of a CS taking place increases by about 20% if mothers have PHI. Furthermore, CS deliveries were more likely to take place between 12.00 and 16.00 pm and on working week days and Saturdays. The results support the hypothesis of patient selection on the basis of holding PHI and exhibit evidence of gynaecologists' 'demand for leisure'.

Suggested Citation

  • Elias Mossialos & Joan Costa-Font & Konstantina Davaki & Konstantinos Karras, 2005. "Is there 'patient selection' in the demand for private maternity care in Greece?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 7-12.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:12:y:2005:i:1:p:7-12
    DOI: 10.1080/13504850420007099
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&doi=10.1080/13504850420007099&magic=repec&7C&7C8674ECAB8BB840C6AD35DC6213A474B5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13504850420007099?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Propper, Carol, 1993. "Constrained choice sets in the U.K. demand for private medical insurance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 287-307, July.
    2. Thomas G. McGuire & Mark V. Pauly, 1991. "Physician Response to Fee Changes with Multiple Payers," Papers 0015, Boston University - Industry Studies Programme.
    3. 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.
    4. Francome, Colin & Savage, Wendy, 1993. "Caesarean section in Britain and the United States 12% or 24%: Is either the right rate?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1199-1218, November.
    5. McGuire, Thomas G. & Pauly, Mark V., 1991. "Physician response to fee changes with multiple payers," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 385-410.
    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. Leo Turcotte & John Robst & Solomon Polachek, 2006. "Medical interventions among pregnant women in fee-for-service and managed care insurance: a propensity score analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(13), pages 1513-1525.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Currie, Janet & Lin, Wanchuan & Zhang, Wei, 2011. "Patient knowledge and antibiotic abuse: Evidence from an audit study in China," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 933-949.
    4. Barili, Emilia & Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica, 2021. "Fee equalization and appropriate health care," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    5. Christopher S. Brunt, 2015. "Medicare Part B Intensity and Volume Offset," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(8), pages 1009-1026, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Bernard Fortin & Nicolas Jacquemet & Bruce Shearer, 2008. "Policy Analysis in Health-Services Market: Accounting for Quality and Quantity," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 91-92, pages 293-319.
    8. Martin Gaynor, 1994. "Issues in the Industrial Organization of the Market for Physician Services," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(1), pages 211-255, March.
    9. Christopher Brunt & Gail Jensen, 2013. "Medicare payment generosity and access to care," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 215-236, October.
    10. Parida Wubulihasimu & Werner Brouwer & Pieter van Baal, 2016. "The Impact of Hospital Payment Schemes on Healthcare and Mortality: Evidence from Hospital Payment Reforms in OECD Countries," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(8), pages 1005-1019, August.
    11. Bradley Chen & Victoria Y. Fan, 2015. "Strategic Provider Behavior Under Global Budget Payment with Price Adjustment in Taiwan," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(11), pages 1422-1436, November.
    12. Baicker, Katherine & Chernew, Michael E. & Robbins, Jacob A., 2013. "The spillover effects of Medicare managed care: Medicare Advantage and hospital utilization," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1289-1300.
    13. Jinhu Li & Jeremiah Hurley & Philip DeCicca & Gioia Buckley, 2014. "Physician Response To Pay‐For‐Performance: Evidence From A Natural Experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(8), pages 962-978, August.
    14. William Encinosa & Didem Bernard & Thomas M. Selden, 2022. "Opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescribing before and after the CDC’s 2016 opioid guideline," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-52, March.
    15. Nolan Miller & Karen Eggleston & Richard Zeckhauser, 2006. "Provider choice of quality and surplus," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 103-117, June.
    16. Brekke, Kurt R. & Holmås, Tor Helge & Monstad, Karin & Straume, Odd Rune, 2017. "Do treatment decisions depend on physicians' financial incentives?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 74-92.
    17. Lu, Fangwen, 2014. "Insurance coverage and agency problems in doctor prescriptions: Evidence from a field experiment in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 156-167.
    18. Olsen, Kim Rose & Kristensen, Troels, 2013. "Patient heterogeneity and income under mixed remuneration - empirical explorations of general practice partnerships," DaCHE discussion papers 2013:7, University of Southern Denmark, Dache - Danish Centre for Health Economics.
    19. 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.
    20. Claudia Keser & Claude Montmarquette & Martin Schmidt & Cornelius Schnitzler, 2020. "Custom-made health-care: an experimental investigation," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.

    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:taf:apeclt:v:12:y:2005:i:1:p:7-12. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEL20 .

    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.