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

Physician's production of primary care in Ontario, Canada

  • Sisira Sarma

    (Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont., Canada)

  • Rose Anne Devlin

    (Department of Economics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ont., Canada)

  • William Hogg

    (Department of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ont., Canada)

This paper examines the factors affecting the number of patient visits per week reported by family physicians in Ontario. The way that a physician is paid is potentially endogenous to the number of patients seen per week, thus an instrumental variable method of estimation is employed to account for the endogeneity bias. Once account is taken of the endogeneity of remuneration as well as relevant physician and practice characteristics, the estimated elasticity of output with respect to hours worked is 0.74; 0.68 in group practices and 0.82 in solo practices. Physicians paid on a non-fee-for-service (NFFS) conduct 15-31% fewer patient visits per week in comparison to those paid under an FFS scheme. Certain patient populations in practices affect patient visits in important ways, as do a number of physician and practice characteristics. Copyright © 2009 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.1447
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): 19 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 14-30

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:19:y:2010:i:1:p:14-30
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. Stock, James H & Wright, Jonathan H & Yogo, Motohiro, 2002. "A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(4), pages 518-29, October.
  2. Christopher F Baum & Mark E. Schaffer & Steven Stillman, 2002. "Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing," North American Stata Users' Group Meetings 2003 05, Stata Users Group.
  3. Gaynor, M. & Gertler, P., 1996. "Moral hazard and Risk Speading in Partnerships," Papers 96-09, RAND - Reprint Series.
  4. Lisa C. DeFelice & W. David Bradford, 1997. "Relative inefficiencies in production between solo and group practice physicians," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(5), pages 455-465.
  5. Encinosa III, William E. & Gaynor, Martin & Rebitzer, James B., 2005. "The Sociology of Groups and the Economics of Incentives: Theory and Evidence on Compensation Systems," IZA Discussion Papers 1851, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  6. Sorensen, Rune J. & Grytten, Jostein, 2003. "Service production and contract choice in primary physician services," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 73-93, October.
  7. Norman K Thurston & Anne M. Libby, 2002. "A Production Function For Physician Services Revisited," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 184-191, February.
  8. Douglas M. Brown, 1988. "Do Physicians Underutilize Aides?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 23(3), pages 342-355.
  9. Gaynor, Martin & Pauly, Mark V, 1990. "Compensation and Productive Efficiency of Partnerships: Evidence from Medical Group Practice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(3), pages 544-73, June.
  10. Kandel, E. & Lazear, E.P., 1990. "Peer Pressure and Partnerships," Papers 90-07, Rochester, Business - Managerial Economics Research Center.
  11. Deri, Catherine, 2005. "Social networks and health service utilization," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1076-1107, November.
  12. James H. Stock & Motohiro Yogo, 2002. "Testing for Weak Instruments in Linear IV Regression," NBER Technical Working Papers 0284, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Cragg, John G. & Donald, Stephen G., 1993. "Testing Identifiability and Specification in Instrumental Variable Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(02), pages 222-240, 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:19:y:2010:i:1:p:14-30. 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.