Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Medical consumption over the life-cycle

Facts from a U.S. Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

  • Published:
Empirical Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigate the association between age and medical spending in the U.S. using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We estimate a partially linear seminonparametric model and construct “pure” life-cycle profiles of health spending simultaneously controlling for time effects (i.e., institutional changes and business cycles effects) and cohort effects (i.e., generation specific conditions). We find that time and cohort effects together introduce a significant estimation bias into predictions of health expenditures per age group, especially for individuals older than 60 years. The estimation bias introduced by cohort effects increases monotonically with age while the bias due to time effects is not significant. The overall effect of Medicare on the cohort and time effects biases is negligible.

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

Notes

  1. Zweifel et al. (2009) present a comparison of the competing theories of the effect of aging on health care expenditures.

  2. All dollar values are denominated in \(2005\) dollars.

  3. Taking logs after averaging introduces an aggregation bias according to Attanasio and Weber (1993) that could be prevented by taking logs before averaging. However, since many individuals do not spend anything on health in any given year, we cannot make the log transformation before the aggregation, unless we are willing to replace the zero entries with arbitrary small positive numbers.

  4. See the following website for more information about the consumer price indices used: http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?cu.

  5. Some of the individuals with private insurance also have public insurance.

  6. Similar cross-sectional results for health expenditures by gender, insurance status, and income groups are available upon request from the authors.

  7. These figures are about \(40\) % lower than figures reported in the National Health Expenditure Accounts (NHEA). MEPS does not contain important (and expensive) health care categories like institutionalized individuals and long-term care expenses, some prescription drugs, R&D, etc. According to Bernard et al. (2012), MEPS, therefore, only reports health expenditures that account for about 9 % of GDP as opposed to the often reported 16–17 % of GDP from the NHEA.

  8. See Fernandez-Villaverde and Krueger (2007) for a similar approach.

  9. We do not control for aging nor time-to-death effects in the current analysis. In our model, the effect of age is a composite of the effect of calendar age and time-to-death which has been found to be a main explanatory component for health expenditures according to Zweifel et al. (1999, 2004).

  10. There is a potential issue that retransformation will fail to provide consistent inferences about parameters when zero health expenditures are observed with sufficient frequency (e.g., see Mullahy 1998 for a formal discussion). However, since we use a pseudo panel rather than a real panel, we eliminate the problem of frequent zero health expenditure entries.

  11. The patterns for total health expenditure are very similar and the results are available upon request from the authors.

References

  • Attanasio OP, Weber G (1993) Consumption growth, the interest rate and aggregation. Rev Econ Stud 60:631–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltagi BH, Moscone F (2010) Health care expenditure and income in the oecd reconsidered: evidence from panel data. Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, Syracuse

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard D, Cowan C, Selden T, Cai L, Catling A, Heffler S (2012) Reconciling medical expenditure estimates from the MEPS and NHEA, 2007. Medicare Medicaid Res Rev 2(4):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll CD, Summers LH (1991) Consumption growth parallels income growth: some new evidence. In: National saving and economic performance. Chicago University Press, Chicago

  • Cunha F, James J, Heckman JJ, Lochner LJ, Masterov DV (2006) Interpreting the evidence on life cycle skill formation. In: Hanushek E, Welch F (eds) Handbook of the eonomics of education. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 697–812

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler DM, Meara E (1998) The medical costs of the young and old: a forty-year perspective. In: Wise DA (ed) Frontiers in the economics of aging. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 215–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler DM, Meara E (2001) The collection of medical spending: an update. In: Wise DA (ed) Themes in the economics of aging. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 99–128

    Google Scholar 

  • De Nardi M, French E, Jones JB (2010) Why do the elderly save? the role of medical expenses. J Polit Econ 118(1):39–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deaton A (1992) Understanding consumption. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Deaton AS, Paxson CH (1998) Aging and inequality in income and health. Am Econ Rev Pap Proc 88(2):248–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng Z (2009) Macroeconomic consequences of alternative reforms to the health insurance system in the U.S Working Paper No 908, University of Miami

  • Fernandez-Villaverde J, Krueger D (2007) Consumption over the life-cycle: some facts from consumer expenditure survey data. Rev Econ Stat 89(3):552–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher C (1980) Differences by age groups in health care spending. Health Care Financ Rev 1(4):65–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Forseca R, Michaud PC, Galama T, Kapteyn A (2009) On the rise of health spending and longevity RAND working paper

  • Gerdtham UG, Jönsson B (2000) International comparisons of health expenditure: theory, data and econometric analysis. In: Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP (eds) Handbook of health economics, vol 1A. Elsevier-North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 11–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Gourinchas PO, Parker JA (2002) Consumption over the life cycle. Econometrica 70(1):47–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman M (1972a) On the concept of health capital and the demand for health. J Polit Econ 80:223–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman M (1972b) The demand for health: a theoretical and empirical investigation. Columbia University Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman M (2000) The human capital model. In: Handbook of health economics, vol 1A. Elsevier North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 347–408

  • Halliday TJ, He H, Zhang H (2010) Health investment over the life-cycle. University of Hawaii, Manoa

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartman M, Catlin A, Lassman D, Cylus J, Heffler S (2008) U.S. health spending by age, selected years through 2004. Health Aff 27:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurd M, Rohwedder S (2009) The level and risk of out-of-pocket health care spending. University of Michigan Retirement Research Center, Working Paper, p 218

  • Jung J, Tran C (2008) The macroeconomics of health savings accounts no 2007-023. Economics Department, Indiana University Bloomington, Caepr Working Papers from Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research

  • Jung J, Tran C (2009) Health care financing over the life cycle, universal medical vouchers and welfare. Department of Economics, Towson University, Working Paper No 2010-03

  • Kippersluis VH, Ourti TV, O’Donnell O, van Doorslaer E (2009) Health and income across the life cycle and generations in europe. J Health Econ 28:818–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotlikoff LJ (2001) Essays on saving, bequest, altruism and life-cycle planning. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams JM, Meara E, Zaslavsky AM, Ayanian JZ (2007) Use of health services by previously uninsured medicare beneficiaries. N Engl J Med 357:143–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meara E, White C, Cutler D (2004) Trends in medical spending by age, 1963–2000. Health Care Financ Rev 23:176–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullahy J (1998) Much ado about two: reconsidering retransformation and the two-part model in health econometrics. J Health Econ 17:247–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruhm CJ (2005) Healthy living in hard times. J Health Econ 24(2):341–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selden TM, Sing M (2008) Aligning the medical expenditure panel survey to aggregate U.S. Benchmarks Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Working Papers No. 08006

  • Sheiner L (2009) Intergenerational aspects of health care. Finance and Economics Discussion Series, Divisions of Research and Statistics and Monetary Affairs, Federal Reserve Board, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Speckman P (1988) Kernel smoothing in partial linear models. J R Stat Soc Ser B 50(3):413–436

    Google Scholar 

  • Suen RMH (2006) Technological advance and the growth in health care spending. Economie D’Avant Garde, Research Report No. 13. University of Rochester

  • Waldo D, Sonnefeld S, McKusick D, Amett R (1989) Health expenditures by age group, 1977 and 1987. Health Care Financ Rev 10(4):111–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 34(3):220–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zweifel P, Felder S, Meier M (1999) Ageing of population and health care expediture: a red herring? Health Econ 8:485–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zweifel P, Felder S, Werblow A (2004) Population ageing and health care expenditure: new evidence on the red herring. Geneva Pap Risk Insur Issues Pract 29:652–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zweifel P, Breyer F, Kifmann M (2009) Health economics, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Partha Deb, Pravin Trivedi, Yuliya Kulikova, participants of the 2nd Australasian Workshop on Econometrics and Health Economics and two anonymous referees for helpful comments. We acknowledge support from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (Ref. No.: R03HS019796) and from the Australian Research Council (Ref. No.: CE110001029).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juergen Jung.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 1, 2, 3 and Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.

Table 1 Summary statistics of the pooled data: MEPS 1996–2007
Table 2 Summary statistics of the pseudo panel data: MEPS 1996–2007
Table 3 Frequencies per cohort and year: MEPS 1996–2007
Fig. 1
figure 1

Stylized facts from cross section summary data. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Fig. 2
figure 2

Cross section of health expenditure using a constructed pseudo panel. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Fig. 3
figure 3

Health expenditure profiles controlling for time and cohort effects, including bootstrapped confidence intervals. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Fig. 4
figure 4

Health expenditure profiles controlling for time and cohort effects. Cohort effect bias: \(\Delta _{\text {cohort}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {cohort}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}})\) from panel 1. Time effect bias: \(\Delta _{\text {time}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}})\) from panel 1. The dotted lines are \(95\) % confidence intervals. We do not report confidence intervals for the time effects bias as this bias is insignificant over the entire age range. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Fig. 5
figure 5

Out-of-pocket health expenditure profiles controlling for time and cohort effects. Cohort effect bias: \(\Delta _{\text {cohort}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {cohort}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}})\) from panel 1. Time effect bias: \(\Delta _{{\text {time}}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}})\) from panel 1. The dotted lines are \(95\) % confidence intervals. We do not report confidence intervals for the time effects bias as this bias is insignificant over the entire age range. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Fig. 6
figure 6

Out-of-pocket health expenditure profiles controlling for time and cohort effects by gender. Cohort effect bias: \(\Delta _{\text {cohort}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {cohort}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}})\) from panel 1 or 2. Time effect bias: \(\Delta _{{\text {time}}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}})\) from panel 1 or 2. The dotted lines are 95 % confidence intervals. We do not report confidence intervals for the time effects bias as this bias is insignificant over the entire age range. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Fig. 7
figure 7

Out-of-pocket health expenditure profiles controlling for time and cohort effects by skill level. Low skilled individuals have up to \(12\) years of education. High skilled individiuals have more than \(12\) years of education. Cohort effect bias: \(\Delta _{\text {cohort}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {cohort}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}})\) from panel 1 or 2. Time effect bias: \(\Delta _{{\text {time}}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}})\) from panel 1 or 2. The dotted lines are \(95\) % confidence intervals. We do not report confidence intervals for the time effects bias as this bias is insignificant over the entire age range. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Fig. 8
figure 8

Health expenditure and out-of-pocket health expenditure profiles controlling for time and cohort effects by insurance status. We only distinguish between insured and uninsured individuals amongst the working population. Almost all individuals older than 65 are insured via Medicare. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Fig. 9
figure 9

Health expenditure and out-of-pocket health expenditure estimation biases by insurance status. We only distinguish between insured and uninsured individuals when they are younger than 65, since almost all individuals older than 65 are insured via Medicare. Cohort effect bias: \(\Delta _{\text {cohort}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {cohort}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}})\). Time effect bias \(\Delta _{{\text {time}}} = ({\text {Age}}+{\text {time}}) - ({\text {Age}})\). The dotted lines are \(95\) % confidence intervals. We do not report confidence intervals for the time effects bias as this bias is insignificant over the entire age range. Source MEPS 1996–2007

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jung, J., Tran, C. Medical consumption over the life-cycle. Empir Econ 47, 927–957 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-013-0774-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-013-0774-6

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation