IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwphe/0505001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Physician-Patient Relationship Revisited - the Patient's View

Author

Listed:
  • Udo Schneider

    (University of Bayreuth)

  • Volker Ulrich

    (University of Bayreuth)

Abstract

The importance of the physician-patient relationship for the health care market is beyond controversy. Most theoretical work is done in a principal-agent framework, dealing with moral hazard problems. Recent work emphasizes a two-sided asymmetric information relationship between physician and patient (double moral hazard). In contrast to most work looking only at the physician's perspectives, our paper concentrates on the patient's view. Estimation results using panel data support the hypotheses that physician consultation and health-relevant behavior are not stochastically independent. This means that health care demand is determined by the patient and not only by the physician. In the recursive bivariate probit model, the patient’s health-relevant behavior has a significant positive influence on the probability of a physician visit. This should be taken into account in the discussion that primary care physicians should function as gatekeepers.

Suggested Citation

  • Udo Schneider & Volker Ulrich, 2005. "The Physician-Patient Relationship Revisited - the Patient's View," HEW 0505001, EconWPA.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwphe:0505001
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econwpa.repec.org/eps/hew/papers/0505/0505001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William Greene, 2001. "Fixed and Random Effects in Nonlinear Models," Working Papers 01-01, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    2. Udo Schneider, 2004. "Asymmetric Information and the Demand for Health Care – the Case of Double Moral Hazard," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 124(2), pages 233-256.
    3. Winand Emons, 1997. "Credence Goods and Fraudelent Experts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(1), pages 107-119, Spring.
    4. Udo Schneider, 2002. "Beidseitige Informationsasymmetrien in der Arzt-Patient-Beziehung: Implikationen für die GKV," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 71(4), pages 447-458.
    5. William Greene, 2004. "Convenient estimators for the panel probit model: Further results," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 21-47, January.
    6. Gaynor, Martin, 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, Spring.
    7. Holly, Alberto & Gardiol, Lucien & Domenighetti, Gianfranco & Brigitte Bisig, 1998. "An econometric model of health care utilization and health insurance in Switzerland," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 513-522, May.
    8. Balia, Silvia & Jones, Andrew M., 2008. "Mortality, lifestyle and socio-economic status," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-26, January.
    9. Grossman, Michael, 1972. "On the Concept of Health Capital and the Demand for Health," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(2), pages 223-255, March-Apr.
    10. William Greene, 2003. "A Interpreting Estimated Parameters and Measuring Individual Heterogeneity in Random Coefficient Models," Working Papers 03-19, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    11. Andrew M. Jones, 2012. "health econometrics," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Ma, Ching-to Albert & McGuire, Thomas G, 1997. "Optimal Health Insurance and Provider Payment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 685-704, September.
    13. Knaus, Thomas & Nuscheler, Robert, 2002. "Incomplete risk adjustment and adverse selection in the German public health insurance system
      [Unvollständiger Risikostrukturausgleich und Adverse Selektion in der Gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung
      ," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance FS IV 02-27, Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB).
    14. McGuire, Thomas G., 2000. "Physician agency," Handbook of Health Economics,in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 461-536 Elsevier.
    15. D. Fabbri & C. Monfardini & R. Radice, 2004. "Testing exogeneity in the bivariate probit model: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to health economics," Working Papers 514, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    16. Wilde, Joachim, 2000. "Identification of multiple equation probit models with endogenous dummy regressors," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 309-312, December.
    17. Zweifel, Peter & Manning, Willard G., 2000. "Moral hazard and consumer incentives in health care," Handbook of Health Economics,in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 409-459 Elsevier.
    18. Winfried Pohlmeier & Volker Ulrich, 1995. "An Econometric Model of the Two-Part Decisionmaking Process in the Demand for Health Care," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30(2), pages 339-361.
    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. Schmid, Andreas, 2007. "Incentive Compatibility and Efficiency in the contractual Insurer-Provider Relationship: Economic Theory and practical Implications: The Case of North Carolina," MPRA Paper 23311, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2008.
    2. Fichera, Eleonora & Emsley, Richard & Sutton, Matt, 2016. "Is treatment “intensity” associated with healthier lifestyle choices? An application of the dose response function," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 149-163.
    3. Eleonora Fichera & James Banks & Matt Sutton, 2014. "Health behaviours and the patient-doctor interaction: The double moral hazard problem," The School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 1415, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    4. Fichera, Eleonora & Gray, Ewan & Sutton, Matt, 2016. "How do individuals’ health behaviours respond to an increase in the supply of health care? Evidence from a natural experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 170-179.
    5. Anthony Scott & Stefanie Schurer & Paul H. Jensen & Peter Sivey, 2009. "The effects of an incentive program on quality of care in diabetes management," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(9), pages 1091-1108.
    6. Till Bärnighausen & David Bloom, 2009. "Changing Research Perspectives on the Global Health Workforce," PGDA Working Papers 4609, Program on the Global Demography of Aging.
    7. Till Bärnighausen & David Bloom, 2009. "Changing Research Perspectives on the Global Health Workforce," PGDA Working Papers 4609, Program on the Global Demography of Aging.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    physician-patient relationship; health behavior; bivariate probit;

    JEL classification:

    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • C33 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:wpa:wuwphe:0505001. 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: (EconWPA). General contact details of provider: http://econwpa.repec.org .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.