IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ivi/wpasad/2001-16.html

Using A Point System In The Management Of Waiting Lists: The Case Of Cataracts

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Herrero Blanco

    (Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas)

  • Eva Rodríguez Mínguez

    (Universitat Pompeu Fabra)

  • José Luis Pinto

    (Universitat Pompeu Fabra)

Abstract

The objective of this study is to explore the possibility of applying a point system as a guide to the management of waiting lists in National Health Systems. Following recent contributions in the axiomatic theory of justice, the ethical properties of a point system are illustrated. In addition, we present the results of an experiment whose objective was to develop a point system for cataract extraction, based on social preferences. The results of the experiment have shown that the analytic methods used here, of focus groups, interview-administered questionnaires, conjoint analysis, and rank-ordered logit, can be usefully combined to determine the total priority score for each patient.

Suggested Citation

  • Carmen Herrero Blanco & Eva Rodríguez Mínguez & José Luis Pinto, 2001. "Using A Point System In The Management Of Waiting Lists: The Case Of Cataracts," Working Papers. Serie AD 2001-16, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    • Handle: RePEc:ivi:wpasad:2001-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ivie.es/downloads/docs/wpasad/wpasad-2001-16.pdf
    File Function: Fisrt version / Primera version, 2001
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Busschbach, Jan J. V. & Hessing, Dick J. & De Charro, Frank Th., 1993. "The utility of health at different stages in life: A quantitative approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 153-158, July.
    2. Eva Rodríguez-Míguez & José Luis Pinto, 1999. "The social value of health programs: Is age a relevant factor?," Working Papers 9904, Universidade de Vigo, Departamento de Economía Aplicada.
    3. William Thomson, 2007. "Fair Allocation Rules," RCER Working Papers 539, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    4. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    5. Maurice Salles, 2016. "Social choice," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 36, pages 518-537, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Browning, Colette J. & Thomas, Shane A., 2001. "Community values and preferences in transplantation organ allocation decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 52(6), pages 853-861, March.
    8. Julie Ratcliffe, 2000. "Public preferences for the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 137-148, March.
    9. W. M. Gorman, 1968. "The Structure of Utility Functions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(4), pages 367-390.
    10. Barnett,William A. & Moulin,Hervé & Salles,Maurice & Schofield,Norman J. (ed.), 1995. "Social Choice, Welfare, and Ethics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521443401, January.
    11. Moulin, Herve, 1994. "Social choice," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 31, pages 1091-1125, Elsevier.
    12. Gerard Debreu, 1959. "Topological Methods in Cardinal Utility Theory," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 76, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    13. Mandy Ryan & Jenny Hughes, 1997. "Using Conjoint Analysis to Assess Women's Preferences for Miscarriage Management," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 261-273, May.
    14. Eva Rodríguez & José Luis Pinto, 2000. "The social value of health programmes: is age a relevant factor?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(7), pages 611-621, October.
    15. Peter A. Ubel & George Loewenstein & Dennis Scanlon & Mark Kamlet, 1996. "Individual Utilities Are Inconsistent with Rationing Choices," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 16(2), pages 108-116, June.
    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. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Angelina L�zaro Alqu�zar & Bego�a �lvarez Farizo, 2006. "Prioritisation of patients on waiting lists: a community workshop approach," Documentos de Trabajo dt2006-08, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.
    3. Solans-Domènech, Maite & Adam, Paula & Tebé, Cristian & Espallargues, Mireia, 2013. "Developing a universal tool for the prioritization of patients waiting for elective surgery," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 118-126.
    4. Goddard, John & Tavakoli, Manouche, 2008. "Efficiency and welfare implications of managed public sector hospital waiting lists," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(2), pages 778-792, January.
    5. Álvarez, Begoña & Rodríguez-Míguez, Eva, 2011. "Patients' self-interested preferences: Empirical evidence from a priority setting experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(8), pages 1317-1324, April.

    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. Paul Dolan & Rebecca Shaw & Aki Tsuchiya & Alan Williams, 2005. "QALY maximisation and people's preferences: a methodological review of the literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(2), pages 197-208, February.
    2. Mira Johri & Laura J. Damschroder & Brian J. Zikmund‐Fisher & Peter A. Ubel, 2005. "The importance of age in allocating health care resources: does intervention‐type matter?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(7), pages 669-678, July.
    3. Aki Tsuchiya, 2012. "Distributional Judgements in the Context of Economic Evaluation," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 38, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Klaus, Bettina, 2011. "Competition and resource sensitivity in marriage and roommate markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 172-186, May.
    5. Javier Perote Peña & Juan Perote Peña, 2003. "A Social Choice Trade-off Between Alternative Fairness Concepts: Solidarity versus Flexibility," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2003/10, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    6. Adele Diederich & Jeannette Winkelhage & Norman Wirsik, 2011. "Age as a Criterion for Setting Priorities in Health Care? A Survey of the German Public View," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-10, August.
    7. Jeannette Winkelhage & Adele Diederich, 2012. "The Relevance of Personal Characteristics in Allocating Health Care Resources—Controversial Preferences of Laypersons with Different Educational Backgrounds," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-21, January.
    8. BOSSERT, Walter & WEYMARK, J.A., 2006. "Social Choice: Recent Developments," Cahiers de recherche 01-2006, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    9. Paul Dolan & Aki Tsuchiya, 2003. "The person trade‐off method and the transitivity principle: an example from preferences over age weighting," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(6), pages 505-510, June.
    10. Juan Perote Peña, 2003. "Solidarity in Terms of Reciprocity," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2003/16, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    11. Bettina Klaus, 2001. "Target Rules for Public Choice Economies on Tree Networks and in Euclidean Spaces," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 13-29, August.
    12. Bloch, Francis & Dutta, Bhaskar, 2009. "Correlated equilibria, incomplete information and coalitional deviations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 721-728, July.
    13. Stefano Moretti & Henk Norde & Kim Pham Do & Stef Tijs, 2002. "Connection problems in mountains and monotonic allocation schemes," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 10(1), pages 83-99, June.
    14. William A. Barnett, 2000. "Which Road Leads to Stable Money Demand?," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: The Theory of Monetary Aggregation, pages 577-592, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    15. Lars Østerdal, 2009. "The lack of theoretical support for using person trade-offs in QALY-type models," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 10(4), pages 429-436, October.
    16. Barnett, William A. & Keating, John W. & Kelly, Logan J., 2008. "Toward a bias corrected currency equivalent index," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(3), pages 448-451, September.
    17. Karen Huang & Regan M. Bernhard & Netta Barak-Corren & Max Bazerman & Joshua D. Greene, 2021. "Veil-of-ignorance reasoning mitigates self-serving bias in resource allocation during the COVID-19 crisis," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(1), pages 1-19, January.
    18. Mæstad, Ottar & Norheim, Ole Frithjof, 2009. "Eliciting people's preferences for the distribution of health: A procedure for a more precise estimation of distributional weights," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 570-577, May.
    19. Heller, Yuval, 2008. "Ex-ante and ex-post strong correlated equilbrium," MPRA Paper 7717, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 11 Mar 2008.
    20. Sidartha Gordon, 2007. "Solidarity in choosing a location on a cycle," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(1), pages 125-147, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    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:ivi:wpasad:2001-16. 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: Departamento de Edición (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ievages.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.