IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_7661.html

Dynamic hospital competition under rationing by waiting times

Author

Listed:
  • Luís Sá
  • Luigi Siciliani
  • Odd Rune Straume

Abstract

We develop a dynamic model of hospital competition where (i) waiting times increase if demand exceeds supply; (ii) patients choose a hospital based in part on waiting times; and (iii) hospitals incur waiting time penalties. We show that, whereas policies based on penalties will lead to lower waiting times, policies that promote patient choice will instead lead to higher waiting times. These results are robust to different game-theoretic solution concepts, designs of the hospital penalty structure, and patient utility specifications. Furthermore, waiting time penalties are likely to be more effective in reducing waiting times if they are designed with a linear penalty structure, but the counterproductive effect of patient choice policies is smaller when penalties are convex. These conclusions are partly derived by calibration of our model based on waiting times and elasticities observed in the English NHS for a common treatment (cataract surgery).

Suggested Citation

  • Luís Sá & Luigi Siciliani & Odd Rune Straume, 2019. "Dynamic hospital competition under rationing by waiting times," CESifo Working Paper Series 7661, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_7661
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp7661.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cirulli, Vanessa & Marini, Giorgia & Marini, Marco A. & Straume, Odd Rune, 2025. "Do hospital mergers reduce waiting times? Theory and evidence from the English NHS," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    2. Brekke, Kurt R. & Canta, Chiara & Siciliani, Luigi & Straume, Odd Rune, 2021. "Hospital competition in a national health service: Evidence from a patient choice reform," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    3. Xinyu Li & Christian Waibel, 2021. "Patients' free choice of physicians is not always good," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(11), pages 2751-2765, November.
    4. Richards-Shubik, Seth & Roberts, Mark S. & Donohue, Julie M., 2022. "Measuring quality effects in equilibrium," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    5. Laura Levaggi & Rosella Levaggi, 2024. "Spatial Competition Models in Health Care Markets: A Review," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 65(3), pages 721-743, November.
    6. Giuseppe Moscelli & Hugh Gravelle & Luigi Siciliani, 2021. "Hospital competition and quality for non‐emergency patients in the English NHS," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(2), pages 382-414, June.
    7. Kortelainen, Mika & Laine, Liisa T. & Lavaste, Konsta & Saxell, Tanja & Siciliani, Luigi, 2023. "Improving Performance Through Allocation and Competition: Evidence from a Patient Choice Reform," Working Papers 156, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    8. Domenico Lisi & Giacomo Pignataro, 2021. "A note on the trade‐off between waiting times and quality in a constrained hospital market," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 180-185, January.
    9. Pedro Pita Barros, 2022. "Quality decreases from introducing patient choice in a National Health Service," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 21(3), pages 351-381, September.
    10. Wende, Danny & Kopetsch, Thomas & Richter, Wolfram F., 2021. "A Demand-Oriented Approach to Health Care Capacity Planning," IZA Discussion Papers 14860, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Bisceglia, Michele & Padilla, Jorge & Piccolo, Salvatore & Sääskilahti, Pekka, 2023. "On the bright side of market concentration in a mixed-oligopoly healthcare industry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • H42 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Private Goods
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • L42 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Vertical Restraints; Resale Price Maintenance; Quantity Discounts

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_7661. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.