IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v26y2017i12pe319-e331.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incentives to patients versus incentives to health care providers: The users' perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Izabela Jelovac
  • Philippe Polomé

Abstract

In theory, health care providers may adapt their professional behavior to the financial incentives resulting from their remuneration. Our research question is whether the users of health care services anticipate such behavior from their general practitioner (GP) and, if they do, what consequences such anticipation has on their preferences regarding financial incentives. Our theoretical model explains users' preferences for one or another incentives scheme, disentangling the financial motives (incentives amounts, wealth) from the behavioral ones (perceived GPs' sensitivity to incentives). We empirically test our theoretical predictions using data from a survey that elicits individual preferences for either patient or provider hypothetical incentives in France. The empirical results confirm the theoretical ones: users tend to prefer incentives to patients rather than to GPs when the amount of GP incentives is high, when the amount of patient incentives is low, when they anticipate that their GP's medical decisions are affected by financial incentives or when their wealth is high. Otherwise, they prefer their GP to face financial incentives.

Suggested Citation

  • Izabela Jelovac & Philippe Polomé, 2017. "Incentives to patients versus incentives to health care providers: The users' perspective," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(12), pages 319-331, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:26:y:2017:i:12:p:e319-e331
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.3511
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3511
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.3511?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ellis, Randall P. & McGuire, Thomas G., 1990. "Optimal payment systems for health services," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 375-396, December.
    2. repec:dau:papers:123456789/6488 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Luc Arrondel & André Masson & Daniel Verger, 2005. "Préférences face au risque et à l'avenir," Post-Print halshs-00754091, HAL.
    4. repec:imp:wpaper:12579 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Cameron Trudy Ann & Quiggin John, 1994. "Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up Questionnaire," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 218-234, November.
    6. Matteo M. Galizzi & Marisa Miraldo & Charitini Stavropoulou, 2016. "In Sickness but Not in Wealth," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(4), pages 503-517, May.
    7. Luc Arrondel & André Masson & Daniel Verger, 2005. "Préférences face au risque et à l'avenir. Types d'épargnants," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 56(2), pages 393-416.
    8. Miraldo, M & Galizzi, M & Stavropoulou, C, 2013. "In sickness but not in wealth: Field evidence on patients’ risk preferences in the financial and health domain," Working Papers 31053, Imperial College, London, Imperial College Business School.
    9. Randall P. Ellis & Thomas G. McGuire, 1993. "Supply-Side and Demand-Side Cost Sharing in Health Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 135-151, Fall.
    10. Marie Allard & Izabela Jelovac & Pierre-Thomas Léger, 2014. "Payment mechanism and GP self-selection: capitation versus fee for service," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 143-160, June.
    11. Izabela Jelovac, 2014. "Primary Care, Gatekeeping and Incentives," Post-Print halshs-00955858, HAL.
    12. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Miraldo, Marisa & Stavropoulou, Charitini, 2016. "In sickness but not in wealth: field evidence on patients’ risk preferences in the financial and health domain," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64764, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Barbara J. Kanninen, 1993. "Optimal Experimental Design for Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(2), pages 138-146.
    14. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    15. Lorenzo Cappellari & Stephen P. Jenkins, 2003. "Multivariate probit regression using simulated maximum likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(3), pages 278-294, September.
    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. Yaping Wu & David Bardey & Yijuan Chen & Sanxi Li, 2021. "Health care insurance policies When the provider and patient may collude," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(3), pages 525-543, March.

    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. Luc Arrondel & André Masson, 2013. "Measuring savers' preferences how and why?," PSE Working Papers halshs-00834203, HAL.
    2. Pablo Brañas‐Garza & Matteo M. Galizzi & Jeroen Nieboer, 2018. "Experimental And Self‐Reported Measures Of Risk Taking And Digit Ratio (2d:4d): Evidence From A Large, Systematic Study," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(3), pages 1131-1157, August.
    3. Jasmin Kantarevic & Boris Kralj, 2016. "Physician Payment Contracts in the Presence of Moral Hazard and Adverse Selection: The Theory and Its Application in Ontario," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(10), pages 1326-1340, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Kim, GwanSeon & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Interis, Matthew G., 2012. "A Method for Improving Welfare Estimates from Multiple-Referendum Surveys," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 1-12, August.
    6. Eric Delattre & Brigitte Dormont, 2003. "Fixed fees and physician‐induced demand: A panel data study on French physicians," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(9), pages 741-754, September.
    7. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    8. Galina Besstremyannaya & Sergei Golovan, 2019. "Physician’s altruism in incentive contracts: Medicare’s quality race," CINCH Working Paper Series 1903, Universitaet Duisburg-Essen, Competent in Competition and Health.
    9. Makoto Kakinaka & Ryuta Kato, 2013. "Regulated medical fee schedule of the Japanese health care system," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 301-317, December.
    10. Mühlbacher Axel, 2007. "Die Ausgestaltung von Versorgungsverträgen: Eine vertragstheoretische Analyse / A Contract Theory Approach to Health Care Contracting," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 227(5-6), pages 765-786, October.
    11. Grant Miller & Kimberly Singer Babiarz, 2013. "Pay-for-Performance Incentives in Low- and Middle-Income Country Health Programs," NBER Working Papers 18932, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Kwideok Han & Jeffrey Vitale & Yong-Geon Lee & Inbae Ji, 2022. "Measuring the Economic Value of the Negative Externality of Livestock Malodor in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-13, August.
    13. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García‐Prado & Paula González & José Luis Pinto‐Prades, 2017. "Risk attitudes in medical decisions for others: An experimental approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 97-113, December.
    14. Biroli, Pietro & Bosworth, Steven J. & Della Giusta, Marina & Di Girolamo, Amalia & Jaworska, Sylvia & Vollen, Jeremy, 2020. "Framing the Predicted Impacts of COVID-19 Prophylactic Measures in Terms of Lives Saved Rather Than Deaths Is More Effective for Older People," IZA Discussion Papers 13753, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Felder, Stefan, 1997. "Costs of dying: alternatives to rationing," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 167-176, February.
    16. Mekonnen, Tigist, 2017. "Willingness to pay for agricultural risk insurance as a strategy to adapt climate change," MERIT Working Papers 2017-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    17. José L Oviedo & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2022. "Contingent valuation of landowner demand for forest amenities: application in Andalusia, Spain [Optimal design for discrete choice contingent valuation surveys: single-bound, double-bound and bivar," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(3), pages 615-643.
    18. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Miraldo, Marisa & Stavropoulou, Charitini & van der Pol, Marjon, 2016. "Doctor–patient differences in risk and time preferences: A field experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 171-182.
    19. Attema, Arthur E. & L'Haridon, Olivier & van de Kuilen, Gijs, 2023. "Decomposing social risk preferences for health and wealth," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    20. Ed Westerhout & K. Folmer, 2002. "Financing medical specialist services in the Netherlands; welfare implications of imperfect agency," CPB Discussion Paper 6.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • J33 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Compensation Packages; Payment Methods

    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:wly:hlthec:v:26:y:2017:i:12:p:e319-e331. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.