IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Health status and heterogeneity of cost-sharing responsiveness: how do sick people respond to cost-sharing?

  • Dahlia K. Remler

    (Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City, New York, USA)

  • Adam J. Atherly

    (Department of Health Policy and Management, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA)

Registered author(s):

    This paper examines whether the responsiveness of health care utilization to cost-sharing varies by health status and the implications of such heterogeneity. First, we show theoretically that if health care utilization of those in poor health is less responsive to cost sharing, this, combined with the skewness of health expenditures in health status, leads to overestimates of the effect of cost sharing. This bias is exacerbated when elasticities are generalized to populations with greater expenditure skewness. Second, we show empirically that cost-sharing responsiveness does differ by health status using data from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. Medicare beneficiaries are stratified into health status groups based on activity of daily living (ADL) impairments and self-reported health status. Separately, for each of the health status groups, we estimate the effect of Medigap insurance on Part B utilization using a two-part expenditure model. We find that the change in expenditures associated with Medigap is smaller for those in poorer health. For example, when stratified using ADLs, Medigap insurance increases expenditures for 'healthy' groups by 36.4%, while the increase for the 'sick' group is 12.7%. Results are qualitatively the same for different forms of supplemental insurance and different methods of health status stratification. We develop a test to demonstrate that adjusting our results for selection bias would result in estimates of greater heterogeneity. Our results imply that a lowerbound estimate of the bias from neglecting heterogeneity is about 2-7%. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

    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.

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/hec.725
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.

    Volume (Year): 12 (2003)
    Issue (Month): 4 ()
    Pages: 269-280

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:12:y:2003:i:4:p:269-280
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749

    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Martin Feldstein & Jonathan Gruber, 1995. "A Major Risk Approach to Health Insurance Reform," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 9, pages 103-130 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Duan, Naihua, et al, 1983. "A Comparison of Alternative Models for the Demand for Medical Care," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 1(2), pages 115-26, April.
    3. Zabinski, Daniel & Selden, Thomas M. & Moeller, John F. & Banthin, Jessica S., 1999. "Medical savings accounts: microsimulation results from a model with adverse selection," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 195-218, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:12:y:2003:i:4:p:269-280. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

    or (Christopher F. Baum)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.