Advertisement

Price Setting for Doctors

  • Kristina Burström
  • Rafael Gisin
Part of the Developments in Health Economics and Public Policy book series (HEPP, volume 7)

Abstract

The Swedish and the Swiss health-care systems are organized in strikingly different ways. In Sweden, most doctors work as salaried public-sector employees. In Switzerland physicians operate their own private businesses. Revenue is regulated on a fee-for-service basis. This discrepancy allows us to compare the effects of two payment schemes, which have been discussed widely in the health economics literature.1 On the one hand, we observe fixed prepayment in Sweden, said to ensure equal treatment of patients regardless of health status. On the other hand, we analyze the effects of fee-for-service payment, a method widely regarded as providing an incentive for the over-treatment of patients (the supplier-induced demand hypothesis).

Keywords

Medical Service Health Insurer County Council Payment Scheme Price Setting 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bezzola M., and P. Martinsson (1998). Global budget vs. competing health insurance. In this Volume.Google Scholar
  2. Blomqvist, A.G. (1991). The doctor as double agent: Information asymmetry, health insurance, and medical care, Journal of Health Economics 10, 411–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blomqvist, A.G. (1992). The Swedish health care system — An economist’s view, Health Politics 21, 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Crivelli, L., and P. Zweifel (1998). Modeling cross-border care in the EU using a principalagent framework, in: Zweifel, P. (ed.), Health, the Medical Profession, and Regulation, Kluwer Academic Publisher: Boston, Dordrecht, London, 229–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Committee on Funding and Organization of Health Services and Medical Care (HSU 2000) (1993). International Perspectives on Health Care Reform in Sweden, Ministry of Health and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
  6. Cromwell, J., and J.B. Mitchell (1986). Physician-induced demand for surgery, Journal of Health Economics 5, 293–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Domenighetti et al. (1993). Revisiting the Most Informed Consumer of Medical Services, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Ellis, R.P., and T.G. McGuire (1990). Optimal payment systems for health services, Journal of Health Economics 9, 375–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Expert Group HSU 2000 (1993). Three Models for Health Care Reform in Sweden, Ministry of Health and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
  10. Feldstein, M.S. (1974). Econometric studies of health economics, in: Kendrick, D.A., and M.D. Intriligator (eds.), Frontiers of quantitative economics, Vol. II, North-Holland: Amsterdam, 377–434.Google Scholar
  11. Fischer, L., and A. Dozet (1998). Incentives for Innovation and Diffusion of New Technologies, In this Volume.Google Scholar
  12. Gölte, L., and K. Hammes (1998). Licensing Doctors, In this Volume.Google Scholar
  13. Hälso-och sjukvårdslagen (Sweden’s Health and Medical Services Act), SFS 1982:763.Google Scholar
  14. Immergut, E.M. (1992). Health Politics. Interests and Institutions in Western Europe, Cambridge University Press, 129-225.Google Scholar
  15. Konkordat der Schweizer Krankenkassen (Federation of Swiss Sick Funds), annual statistics (excerpts), 1989 and 1993.Google Scholar
  16. Landstinget Dalarna (Dalarna County Council) (1996), Workload for general practitioners in Dalarna county council, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  17. Landstingsförbundet (Sweden’s Federation of county councils), annual statistics, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. Lee, C.H. (1995). Optimal medical treatment under asymmetric information, Journal of Health Economics 14, 419–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McGuire, T.G., and M.V. Pauly (1991). Physician response to fee changes with multiple payers, Journal of Health Economics 10(4), 385–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Milgrom, P., and J. Roberts (1992). Economics, organization and management, Prentice Hall: New Jersey.Google Scholar
  21. Mueller D.C. (1989). Public Choice II, Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Niskanen, W.A. (1971). Bureaucracy and Representative Government, Aldine Atherton: Chicago and New York.Google Scholar
  23. Rehnberg, C. (1990). The organization of public health care — An economic analysis of the Swedish health care system, Linköping Studies in Arts and Science 58, Linköping.Google Scholar
  24. Rochaix, L. (1989). Information asymmetry and search in the market for physicians’ services, Journal of Health Economics 8, 53–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rochaix, L. (1993). Financial incentives for physicians: The Quebec experience, Health Economics 2, 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schweizerische Ärztegesellschaft FMH (Swiss Medical Association), member statistics, 1989 and 1993.Google Scholar
  27. Socialstyrelsen (Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare), SOS 1994:9.Google Scholar
  28. Statistiska Centralbyrån (Statistics Sweden), Health in Sweden, Yearbook of Health Statistics 1991/92.Google Scholar
  29. Swedish Health Service at the Crossroads (1992). Health Policy 21/2, special issue, 95-166.Google Scholar
  30. Wedig, G.J. (1993). Ramsey pricing and supply-side incentives in physician markets, Journal of Health Economics 12, 365–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zweifel, P., and R. Eichenberger (1992). The Political Economy of Corporatism in Medicine: Self-Regulation or Cartel Management?, Journal of Regulatory Economics 4, 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zweifel, P., and F. Breyer (1997). Health Economics, Oxford University Press: New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristina Burström
  • Rafael Gisin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations