The effect of practice budgets on patient waiting times: allowing for selection bias

被引:25
作者
Dusheiko, M [1 ]
Gravelle, H
Jacobs, R
机构
[1] Univ York, Natl Primary Care Res & Dev Ctr, Ctr Hlth Econ, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ York, Ctr Hlth Econ, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
关键词
budgets; fundholding; waiting times; selection bias; treatment effects;
D O I
10.1002/hec.937
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Under the UK fundholding scheme, general practices could elect to hold a budget to meet the costs of some types of elective surgery (chargeable admissions) for their patients. It was alleged that patients of fundholding practices had shorter waits for elective surgery than the patients of non-fundholders. Comparison of waiting times between fundholding and non-fundholding practices are potentially confounded by selection bias as fundholding was voluntary. We estimate the effect of a practice's fundholding status on the waiting times of its patients using both cross-sectional methods (OLS, propensity score, instrumental variables, Heckman selection correction and Heckman heterogenous effects estimators) and difference in differences methodologies to correct for selection bias. The estimated effect of fundholding status was to significantly reduce the waiting times for chargeable admissions of the patients of fundholders by 4.1-6.6% (or 4-7 days) with the instrumental variables and Heckman selection correction estimators yielding the highest estimates. We also find that patients of fundholding practices had shorter waits (by 3.7% or 2 days) for non-chargeable elective admissions, suggesting that fundholders were able to obtain shorter waits for all types of elective admissions. Copyright (C) 2004 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:941 / 958
页数:18
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]  
AAKVIK A, 2003, TREATMENT EFFECTS DI, P262
[2]  
[Anonymous], MEAS MULT DEPR SMALL
[3]  
[Anonymous], STAT REF MAN REL 7
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1998, Learning from the NHS Internal Market: A Review of the Evidence
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1994, Implementing GP Fundholding: Wild Card or Winning Hand?
[6]  
Baines DL, 1996, HEALTH ECON, V5, P129, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199603)5:2<129::AID-HEC190>3.0.CO
[7]  
2-R
[8]   Instrumental variables and GMM: Estimation and testing [J].
Baum, Christopher F. ;
Schaffer, Mark E. ;
Stillman, Steven .
STATA JOURNAL, 2003, 3 (01) :1-31
[9]   Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores [J].
Becker, Sascha O. ;
Ichino, Andrea .
STATA JOURNAL, 2002, 2 (04) :358-377
[10]  
Blundell R., 2000, Fiscal Studies, V21, P427, DOI [DOI 10.1111/J.1475-5890.2000.TB00031.X, 10.1111/fisc.2000.21.issue-4]