Skip to main content
Log in

Building a Competitive Insurance System

Switzerland’s Strategy for Managed-Care Healthcare

  • Review Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper applies the five standard criteria for assessing the performance of an economy to one of its sectors, namely, the provision of health care. They are (1) matching of consumer preferences, (2) technical efficiency, (3) adaptive capacity, (4) dynamic efficiency, and (5) a distribution of income that provides incentives for producers to attain criteria (1) through (4).

Being insurance-based, the Swiss healthcare system comprises three contractual relationships that can be judged in the light of these criteria.

First, the relationship between consumers and health insurers satisfies criterion (1) to a high degree, not least thanks to the managed-care (MC) options that were introduced with the new law on health insurance (effective 1996). However, it fails with regard to (2) because cost reductions achieved by MC cannot be passed on to consumers but to a very limited degree. The relationship between health insurers and service providers, by way of contrast, does not fully satisfy any of the five criteria, mainly because health insurers continue to operate under an any-willing-provider clause for conventional fee-for-service care. This makes it difficult for them to find MC providers. Finally, the relationship between consumers and healthcare providers match consumer preferences well (criterion 1) but do not result in an income distribution in the healthcare sector that is conducive to the attainment of criteria (2) through (4).

The total score for the Swiss healthcare system amounts to 13 points out of a maximum of 30, to which the relationship between insurers and providers contributes only 3 points. Therefore, performance could be improved by granting health insurers freedom to contract not only with domestic but also foreign healthcare providers offering a favorable benefit cost ratio.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. OECD Health Data, Paris 2004

  2. Hirshleifer J, Hirshleifer D. Price theory and applications, 6th ed. London, UK: Prentice-Hall, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  3. Laffont J-J, Tirole J. Theory of incentives in procurement and regulation. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  4. Federal Office of Health (Bundesamt für Gesundheit, BAG). Statistik der obligatorischen Krankenversicherung (Statistics of mandatory health insurance) [several issues]. Bern: EDMZ, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  5. Schut FT, Van de Ven WPMM. Rationing and competition in the Dutch health-care system. Health Econ 2005; 14(51): 59–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wörz M, Busse R. Analysing the impact of health-care system change in the EU member states: Germany. Health Econ 2005; 14(51): 133–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lehmann H. Managed care. Kosten sparen mit alternativen Versicherungsformen? [Managed care: cost savings through alternative health insurance settings?). Zurich: Rüegger, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lehmann H, Zweifel P. Choice of managed care and cost savings: the role of latent health status. In: Chiappori P-A and Gollier C, editors. Competitive Failures in Insurance Markets: theory and policy implications Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lehmann H, Zweifel P. Innovation and risk selection in deregulated social health insurance. J Health Econ 2004; 23(4): 997–1012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Laske-Aldershof T, Schut E, Beck K, et al. Consumer mobility in social health insurance markets: a five-country comparison. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2004; 3(4): 229–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zweifel P, Breyer F. Health economics. New York (NY): Oxford University Press, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  12. Oliver A, Mossialos E, Wilsford D, editors. Legacies and latitude in European health policy. J Health Politics Pol Law 2005; (1–2): 1–314

  13. Oliver A, Mossialos E, Maynard A. The contestable nature of health policy analysis. Health Econ 2005; 14(51): 3–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Winkelmann R. Work and health in Switzerland: immigrants and natives [working paper]. Zurich: University of Zurich, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  15. van Doorslaer E, Koolman X, Puffer F. Equity in the use of physicians in the OECD countries: has equal treatment for equal need been achieved? In: Measuring up: health systems performance in OECD countries. Paris: OECD, 2002: 225–48

    Google Scholar 

  16. Leu RE, Schellhorn M. Intermediate report to the Swiss National Science Foundation on the impact of the new law on health insurance on the insured. Bern: University of Bern, 2004

    Google Scholar 

  17. WHO. World health report. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2000

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Zweifel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zweifel, P. Building a Competitive Insurance System. PharmacoEconomics 24 (Suppl 2), 111–119 (2006). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200624002-00012

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200624002-00012

Keywords

Navigation