Has the influence of managed care waned? Evidence from the market for physician services.
ABSTRACT Managed care has been the dominant organization of health care coverage in the United States, and seeks to achieve cost control by constraining services. The restrictive practices of managed care organizations have been widely criticized and the role of managed care in constraining health care services may be declining. Physician behavior is also believed to be influenced by the practices of managed care organization. This study examines the evolving nature of managed care and its restrictive effects on the provision of physician services. Physicians can choose whether and to what extent they are involved in managed care, so it is an endogenous decision. We employ instrumental variables method to correct for this endogeneity. Using data from the Community Tracking Study physician surveys from 2000-2001 and 2004-2005, we find that managed care organizations have became relatively less restrictive over time in terms of limiting the provision of physician services, compared to non-managed care organizations. These results suggest that managed care and non-managed care are converging in their effects on the provision of physician services.
- SourceAvailable from: Harold Luft[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This paper synthesizes results from peer-reviewed literature published from 1997 to mid-2001, on various dimensions of health maintenance organization (HMO) plan performance. Results from seventy-nine studies suggest that both types of plans provide roughly comparable quality of care, while HMOs lower use of hospital and other expensive resources somewhat. At the same time, HMO enrollees report worse results on many measures of access to care and lower levels of satisfaction, compared with non-HMO enrollees. Quality-of-care results in particular are heterogeneous, which suggests that quality is not uniform--that it varies widely among providers, plans (HMO and non-HMO), and geographic areas.Health Affairs 07/2002; 21(4):63-86. DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.21.4.63 · 4.97 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This paper examines the depth and breadth of the public backlash against managed care and the reasons for it. We conclude that the backlash is real and influenced by at least two principal factors: (1) A significant proportion of Americans report problems with managed care plans; and (2) the public perceives threatening and dramatic events in managed care that have been experienced by just a few. In addition, public concern is driven by fear that regardless of how well their plans perform today, care might not be available or paid for when they are very sick.Health Affairs 07/1998; 17(4):80-94. DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.17.4.80 · 4.97 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The paper focuses on two estimation methods that have been widely used to address endogeneity in empirical research in health economics and health services research-two-stage predictor substitution (2SPS) and two-stage residual inclusion (2SRI). 2SPS is the rote extension (to nonlinear models) of the popular linear two-stage least squares estimator. The 2SRI estimator is similar except that in the second-stage regression, the endogenous variables are not replaced by first-stage predictors. Instead, first-stage residuals are included as additional regressors. In a generic parametric framework, we show that 2SRI is consistent and 2SPS is not. Results from a simulation study and an illustrative example also recommend against 2SPS and favor 2SRI. Our findings are important given that there are many prominent examples of the application of inconsistent 2SPS in the recent literature. This study can be used as a guide by future researchers in health economics who are confronted with endogeneity in their empirical work.Journal of Health Economics 06/2008; 27(3):531-43. DOI:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2007.09.009 · 2.58 Impact Factor