IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Physician ethics: undermined or enhanced by modes of payment?

Listed author(s):
  • Zweifel, Peter
  • Janus, Katharina
Registered author(s):

    Background: In the medical literature ((Begley (1987), Gervais et al. (1999), American Academy of Dermatology (2000)), the view prevails that any change away from fee-for-service (FFS) jeopardizes medical ethics, defined as motivational preference in this article. The objective of this contribution is to test this hypothesis by first developing two theoretical models of behavior, building on the pioneering works of Ellis and McGuire (1986) and Pauly and Redisch (1973). Medical ethics is reflected by a parameter α which indicates how much importance the physician attributes to patient well-being relative to his or her own income. Accordingly, a weakening of ethical orientation amounts to a fall in the value of α. While economic theory traditionally takes preferences as predetermined, such a change is possible in the light of Evolutionary Economics (Bolle, 2000). Methods: The model based on Ellis and McGuire (1986) depicts the behavior of a physician in private practice, while the one based on Pauly and Redisch (1973) applies to providers who share resources such as in hospital or group practice. Two changes in the mode of payment are analyzed, one from FFS to prospective payment (PP), the other, to pay-for-performance (P4P). One set of predictions relates physician effort to a change in the mode of payment; another, physician effort to a change in α, the parameter reflecting ethics. Using these two relationships, a change in ethics can observationally be related to a change in the mode of payment. The predictions derived from the models are pitted against several case studies from diverse countries. Results: A shift from FFS to PP is predicted to give rise to a negative observed relationship between medical ethics of physicians in private practice under a wide variety of circumstances, more so than a shift to P4P, which can even be seen as enhancing medical ethics provided physician effort has a sufficiently high marginal effectiveness in terms of patient well-being. This prediction is confirmed to a considerable degree by circumstantial evidence coming from the case studies. As to physicians working in hospital or group practice, the prediction is again that an observer will infer that a transition in hospital payment from FFS to PP weakens their ethical orientation. However, this prediction is not fully borne out; a likely reason is that hospitals also differ strongly in terms of their organizational culture, a factor that is not held constant in the case studies. A transition to P4P may lead observers to conclude that it actually enhances medical ethics of healthcare providers working in hospital or group practice. This prediction receives a degree of empirical support from the case studies. Conclusion: The claim that moving away from FFS undermines medical ethics is far too sweeping. It can only in part be justified by observed relationships, which even may suggest that a transition to P4P strengthens medical ethics.

    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: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/145708/1/VfS_2016_pid_6699.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association in its series Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change with number 145708.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2016
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:vfsc16:145708
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.socialpolitik.org/
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    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. Bolle, Friedel, 2000. "Is altruism evolutionarily stable? And envy and malevolence?: Remarks on Bester and Guth," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 131-133, May.
    2. Pauly, Mark V & Redisch, Michael, 1973. "The Not-For-Profit Hospital as a Physicians' Cooperative," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(1), pages 87-99, March.
    3. Bester, Helmut & Guth, Werner, 1998. "Is altruism evolutionarily stable?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 193-209, February.
    4. Sicsic, Jonathan & Le Vaillant, Marc & Franc, Carine, 2012. "Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations in primary care: An explanatory study among French general practitioners," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 140-148.
    5. Ellis, Randall P. & McGuire, Thomas G., 1986. "Provider behavior under prospective reimbursement : Cost sharing and supply," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 129-151, June.
    6. Maurus Rischatsch & Maria Trottmann & Peter Zweifel, 2013. "Generic substitution, financial interests, and imperfect agency," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 115-138, June.
    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:zbw:vfsc16:145708. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

    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.