Advertisement

Trends and regional variation in rates of orthopaedic surgery in Germany: the impact of competition

  • Natalie Baier
  • Lisa-Marie Sax
  • Leonie Sundmacher
Original Paper

Abstract

Competition in hospital services has been fostered in an increasing number of OECD countries with the goal that hospitals improve quality and/or efficiency. With the same intention competition has been promoted in Germany when introducing a system of prospective payments based on diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) in 2003. Beyond its intended effects, however, the reform led to a substantial increase in hospital activity, particularly for orthopaedic surgery. To shed more light on these developments, this paper analyses the relationship between the rates of certain orthopaedic surgical procedures and hospital competition across and within each of Germany’s 402 districts. We measured competition with the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) based on market shares for hip replacements, knee replacements and spine surgeries. Using spatial panel regression, which allows for spatial dependency and unobserved individual heterogeneity, we found that the rate of hip and knee replacements rose as market concentration increased. A potential explanation might be that hospitals specialize in these particular procedures.

Keywords

Orthopaedic surgery Regional variation Spatial panel regression Hospital competition Germany 

JEL Classification

I11 I18 C23 

Notes

Funding

This project was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF, grant number 01EH1202A).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics

An ethic approval was not required for this study.

Supplementary material

10198_2018_990_MOESM1_ESM.docx (28 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 27 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    OECD: Competition in Hospitals Services. http://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/50527122.pdf (2012). Accessed 4 June 2018
  2. 2.
    Gaynor, M., Town, R.J.: Competition in Health Care Markets. In: Pauly, M.V., Mcguire T.G., Barros, P.P. (eds.) Handbook of Health Economics, pp. 499–637. Elsevier: (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Melnick, G.A., Zwanziger, J., Bamezai, A., Pattison, R.: The effects of market structure and bargaining position on hospital prices. J. Health Econ. 11(3), 217–233 (1992)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kessler, D.P., McClellan, M.B.: Is hospital competition socially wasteful? Q. J. Econ. (2000).  https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300554863
  5. 5.
    Cooper, Z., Gibbons, S., Jones, S., McGuire, A.: Does hospital competition save lives? Evidence from the English NHS patient choice Reforms. Econ. J. (London, England) (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2011.02449.x
  6. 6.
    Braun, T., Rau, F., Tuschen, K.H.: Die DRG-Einführung aus gesundheitspolitischer Sicht. Eine Zwischenbilanz. In: Klauber, J., Robra, B.-P., Schellschmidt, H. (eds.) Krankenhausreport 2007. Krankenhausvergütung - Ende der Konvergenzphase? vol. 2007. Schattauer, Stuttgart [u.a.] (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Geissler, A., Scheller-Kreinsen, D., Busse, R.: Germany: Understanding G-DRGs. In: Busse, R., Geissler, A., Quentin, W., Wiley, M. (eds.) Diagnosis-related groups in Europe. Moving towards transparency, efficiency and quality in hospitals. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies series, pp. 243–271. Open University Press, Maidenhead (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cots, F., Chiarello, X.S., Castells, X., Quentin, W.: DRG-based hospital payment: Intended and unintended consequences. In: Busse, R., Geissler, A., Quentin, W., Wiley, M. (eds.) Diagnosis-related groups in Europe. Moving towards transparency, efficiency and quality in hospitals. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies series, pp. 75–92. Open University Press, Maidenhead (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Augurzky, B., Gülker, R., Mennicken, R., Felder, S., Meyer, S., Wasem, J., Gülker, H., Siemssen, N.: Mengenentwicklung und Mengensteuerung stationärer Leistungen: Endbericht - Mai 2012. Forschungsprojekt im Auftrag des GKV Spitzenverbandes: (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reifferscheid, A., Thomas, D., Wasem, J.: Zehn Jahre DRG-System in Deutschland - Theoretische Anreizwirkungen und empirische Evidenz. In: Klauber, J., Geraedts, M., Friedrich, J., Wasem, J. (eds.) Krankenhausreport 2013. Mengendynamik: mehr Menge, mehr Nutzen? Schattauer, Stuttgart (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Augurzky, B., Kopetsch, T., Schmitz, H.: What accounts for the regional differences in the utilisation of hospitals in Germany? Eur J Health Econ (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-012-0407-6
  12. 12.
    Nolting, H.Z.K., Deckenbach, B., Gottberg, A.L.K., Klemperer, D., Westrick, G., Schwenk, M.: U.: Healthcare fact check. Regional Variations in German Healthcare. https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/BSt/Publikationen/GrauePublikationen/Report_VV_FC_Regional_variations_2011.pdf (2011). Accessed 23 May 2017
  13. 13.
    Storz-Pfennig, P.: Germany: Geographic variations in health care. In: OECD Health Policy Studies, pp. 245–265. OECD Publishing (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kumar, A., Schoenstein, M.: Managing Hospital Volumes: Germany and Experiences from OECD Countries. OECD Health Working Papers: (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3xwtg2szzr-en
  15. 15.
    Arrow, K.J.: Uncertainty and the Welfare Economics of Medical Care. Am. Econ. Rev. 53, 941–973 (1963)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Richardson, J.R.J., Peacock, S.J.: Supplier-induced demand. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy (2006).  https://doi.org/10.2165/00148365-200605020-00003
  17. 17.
    Roemer, M.: Bed supply and hospital utilization: a natural experiment. Hospitals 35, 36–42 (1961)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fuchs, V.R.: The supply of surgeons and the demand for operations. J. Hum. Resour (1978).  https://doi.org/10.2307/145247
  19. 19.
    Ellis, R.P., McGuire, T.G.: Provider behavior under prospective reimbursement. Cost sharing and supply. J. Health Econ. 5(2), 129–151 (1986)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Robinson, J.C., Luft, H.S.: The impact of hospital market structure on patient volume, average length of stay, and the cost of care. J Health Econ 4(4), 333–356 (1985)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lüngen, M., Büscher, G.: Mengensteigerung in der stationären Versorgung: Wo liegt die Ursache? In: Klauber, J., Geraedts, M., Friedrich, J., Wasem, J. (eds.) Krankenhausreport 2013. Mengendynamik: mehr Menge, mehr Nutzen? Schattauer, Stuttgart (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Steffen, P., Offermanns, M.: Erfolgskritische Faktoren von Krankenhausfusionen. Forschungsgutachten im Auftrag der Schubert Unternehmensgruppe und der Bank für Sozialwirtschaft. Deutsches Krankenhausinstitut (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ward, M.D., Gleditsch, K.S.: Spatial Regression Models. Sage university papers series. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, vol. 155. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Skinner, J.: Causes and consequences of regional variations in health care. In: Pauly, M.V., Mcguire T.G., Barros, P.P. (eds.) Handbook of Health Economics, pp. 45–93. Elsevier (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pierdzioch, S.: Preisbereinigung der Dienstleistungen von Krankenhäusern in den Volkswirtschaftlichen Gesamtrechnungen. Wirtschaft und Statistik. 10, 845–851 (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rhoades, S.A.: Market share inequality, the HHI, and other measures of the firm-composition of a market. Rev Ind Organ. (1995).  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01024300
  27. 27.
    Motta, M.: Competition Policy. Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schmid, A., Ulrich, V.: Konzentration und Marktmacht bei Krankenhäusern. Gesundh ökon Qual Manag. (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1273379
  29. 29.
    Schmid, A., Ulrich, V.: Consolidation and concentration in the German hospital market: The two sides of the coin. Health Policy. (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.08.012
  30. 30.
    Judge, A., Welton, N.J., Sandhu, J., Ben-Shlomo, Y.: Geographical variation in the provision of elective primary hip and knee replacement: the role of socio-demographic, hospital and distance variables. J. Public Health. (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdp061
  31. 31.
    Deutsche Krankenhausgesellschaft: Bestandsaufnahme zur Krankenhausplanung und Investitionsfinanzierung in den Bundesländern. http://www.dkgev.de/dkg.php/cat/159/aid/11446/title/Bestandsaufnahme_zur_Krankenhausplanung_und_Investitionsfinanzierung_in_den_Bundeslaendern_%28Stand%3A_Januar_2014%29 (2014). Accessed 23 May 2017
  32. 32.
    Schäfer, T., Pritzkuleit, R., Jeszenszky, C., Malzahn, J., Maier, W., Günther, K., Niethard, F.: Trends and geographical variation of primary hip and knee joint replacement in Germany. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage: (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2012.11.006
  33. 33.
    Marmot, M.G., Wilkinson, R.G.: Social Determinants of Health, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2011)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Joines, J.D., Hertz-Picciotto, I., Carey, T.S., Gesler, W., Suchindran, C.: A spatial analysis of county-level variation in hospitalization rates for low back problems in North Carolina. Soc Sci Med 56(12), 2541–2553 (2003)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hawker, G.A., Guan, J., Croxford, R., Coyte, P.C., Glazier, R.H., Harvey, B.J., Wright, J.G., Williams, J.I., Badley, E.M.: A prospective population-based study of the predictors of undergoing total joint arthroplasty. Arth. Rheumat. (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1002/art.22146
  36. 36.
    Gesundheitliche Lage der Männer in: Deutschland. Beiträge zur Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes. Robert-Koch-Institut, Berlin (2014)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Eichhorst, W.: T.E.: Erwerbstätigkeit im Lebenszyklus. Benchmarking Deutschland: Steigende Beschäftigung bei Jugendlichen und Älteren. IZA Res. Rep. 34 (2011)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mundlak, Y.: On the pooling of time series and cross section data. Econometrica (1978).  https://doi.org/10.2307/1913646
  39. 39.
    Snijders, T.A.B., Bosker, R.J.: Multilevel analysis. An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling, 2nd edn. Sage, Los Angeles (2012)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Elhorst, J.P.: Applied spatial econometrics: raising the bar. Spat. Econ. Anal. (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1080/17421770903541772
  41. 41.
    Franzese, R.J., Hays, J.C.: Spatial Econometric Models of Cross-Sectional Interdependence in Political Science Panel and Time-Series-Cross-Section Data. Political Analysis: (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpm005
  42. 42.
    LeSage, J.P., Pace, R.K.: Introduction to spatial econometrics. Statistics, Textbooks and Monographs. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission: Horizontal Merger Guidelines. https://www.justice.gov/atr/horizontal-merger-guidelines-08192010#5c (2010). Accessed 23 May 2017
  44. 44.
    Kristensen, T., Bogetoft, P., Pedersen, K.M.: Potential gains from hospital mergers in Denmark. Health Care Manag. Sci. (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10729-010-9133-8
  45. 45.
    Schäfer, T., Pritzkuleit, R., Hannemann, F., Günther, K., Malzahn, J., Niethard, F., Krauspe, R.: Trends und regionale Unterschiede in der Inanspruchnahme von Wirbelsäulemoperationen. In: Klauber, J., Geraedts, M., Friedrich, J., Wasem, J. (eds.) Krankenhausreport 2013. Mengendynamik: mehr Menge, mehr Nutzen? pp. 111–133. Schattauer, Stuttgart (2013) (2013)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Krabbe-Alkemade, Y.J.F.M., Groot, T.L.C.M., Lindeboom, M.: Competition in the Dutch hospital sector: an analysis of health care volume and cost. The European journal of health economics: HEPAC (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-016-0762-9
  47. 47.
    Barros, P.P., Brouwer, W.B.F., Thomson, S., Varkevisser, M.: Competition among health care providers: helpful or harmful? Eur. J. Health Econ. HEPAC Health Econ. Prevent. Care (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-015-0736-3
  48. 48.
    Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss: Pressemitteilung: G-BA legt vier Leistungsbereiche für die Erprobung von Qualitätsverträgen fest. https://www.g-ba.de/downloads/34-215-688/18_2017-05-18_Qualitaetsvertraege_Leistungsbereiche.pdf (2017). Accessed 23 May 2017
  49. 49.
    RDC of the Federal Statistical Office and Statistical Offices of the Länder: DRG Statistic, 2006-2011, own calculations (2012)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    BBSR Bonn: Inkar Daten. http://www.inkar.de/ (2018). Accessed 28 June 2018

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Health Care Management, Berlin Centre for Health Economics Research (BerlinHECOR)Technische Universität BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.City University LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Department of Health Services ManagementLudwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations