Effects of nurse visit copayment on primary care use: Do low-income households pay the price?

IF 3.4 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Journal of Health Economics Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2024.102866
Tapio Haaga , Petri Böckerman , Mika Kortelainen , Janne Tukiainen
{"title":"Effects of nurse visit copayment on primary care use: Do low-income households pay the price?","authors":"Tapio Haaga ,&nbsp;Petri Böckerman ,&nbsp;Mika Kortelainen ,&nbsp;Janne Tukiainen","doi":"10.1016/j.jhealeco.2024.102866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Nurses are increasingly providing primary care, yet the literature on cost-sharing has paid little attention to nurse visits. We employ a staggered difference-in-differences design to examine the effects of adopting a 10-euro copayment for nurse visits on the use of public primary care among Finnish adults. We find that the copayment reduced nurse visits by 9%–10% during a one-year follow-up. There is heterogeneity by income in absolute terms, but not in relative terms. The spillover effects on general practitioner (GP) use are negative but small, with varying statistical significance. We also analyze the subsequent nationwide abolition of the copayment. However, we refrain from drawing causal conclusions from this due to the lack of credibility in the parallel trends assumption. Overall, our analysis suggests that moderate copayments can create a greater barrier to access for low-income individuals. We also provide an example of using a pre-analysis plan for retrospective observational data.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629624000110/pdfft?md5=f90765e39ac888abea9a4bef3e5877e3&pid=1-s2.0-S0167629624000110-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629624000110","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nurses are increasingly providing primary care, yet the literature on cost-sharing has paid little attention to nurse visits. We employ a staggered difference-in-differences design to examine the effects of adopting a 10-euro copayment for nurse visits on the use of public primary care among Finnish adults. We find that the copayment reduced nurse visits by 9%–10% during a one-year follow-up. There is heterogeneity by income in absolute terms, but not in relative terms. The spillover effects on general practitioner (GP) use are negative but small, with varying statistical significance. We also analyze the subsequent nationwide abolition of the copayment. However, we refrain from drawing causal conclusions from this due to the lack of credibility in the parallel trends assumption. Overall, our analysis suggests that moderate copayments can create a greater barrier to access for low-income individuals. We also provide an example of using a pre-analysis plan for retrospective observational data.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
护士出诊共付额对初级保健使用的影响:低收入家庭是否付出了代价?
提供初级医疗服务的护士越来越多,但有关费用分担的文献却很少关注护士上门服务。我们采用了一种交错差分设计,研究了对芬兰成年人使用公共初级医疗服务的情况采用 10 欧元的护士就诊共付额所产生的影响。我们发现,在为期一年的跟踪调查中,共付额使护士上门服务减少了 9%-10%。收入的绝对值存在异质性,但相对值不存在异质性。对全科医生(GP)使用的溢出效应是负面的,但规模较小,统计意义不一。我们还分析了随后在全国范围内取消共付额的情况。然而,由于平行趋势假设缺乏可信度,我们没有就此得出因果结论。总体而言,我们的分析表明,适度的共付额可能会对低收入人群造成更大的就医障碍。我们还提供了一个将分析前计划用于回顾性观察数据的例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Health Economics
Journal of Health Economics 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
96
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: This journal seeks articles related to the economics of health and medical care. Its scope will include the following topics: Production and supply of health services; Demand and utilization of health services; Financing of health services; Determinants of health, including investments in health and risky health behaviors; Economic consequences of ill-health; Behavioral models of demanders, suppliers and other health care agencies; Evaluation of policy interventions that yield economic insights; Efficiency and distributional aspects of health policy; and such other topics as the Editors may deem appropriate.
期刊最新文献
Harm reduction for addictive consumption: When does it improve health and when does it backfire? The maternal and infant health consequences of restricted access to abortion in the United States The effects of tobacco 21 laws on smoking and vaping: Evidence from panel data and biomarkers The impact of children's access to public health insurance on their cognitive development and behavior Medical ethics and physician motivations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1