{"title":"The effect of health facility ownership on perceived healthcare quality: evidence from Ghana","authors":"Alex Bawuah, Simon Appleton, Yang Li","doi":"10.1007/s10754-024-09385-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Whether private healthcare providers should be encouraged over public providers remains unclear. On the one hand, because private providers are profit-driven, they are more motivated to compete for demand by enhancing quality if demand is elastic. However, because they are more motivated to maximize revenue, they may sacrifice quality to maximize profit. A crucial factor in determining whether private providers should be encouraged is the extent to which their quality exceeds or falls short of that of the public provider. This study, therefore, investigates whether the public and private differ in providing quality healthcare services using the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey. Our measure of healthcare quality is based on patient satisfaction level with nine healthcare services (cleanliness, waiting time, comfort and safety, consultation time, privacy, listening, explanation, treatment advice and confidentiality) provided by public and private healthcare facilities. We applied an instrumental variable approach to account for endogeneity issues related to the patient’s choice of healthcare provider. We find that private facility users have a higher probability of being very satisfied with “waiting time”, “consultation time”, “listening”, “cleanliness”, “comfort and safety”, “confidentiality”, and “privacy” than public users, thus suggesting that private facilities provide better service than public. We thus recommend encouraging the private sector to enter the healthcare market. We also find that failing to account for endogeneity in provider choice when estimating the effect of healthcare facility ownership on healthcare service quality underestimates the effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":44403,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Economics and Management","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Economics and Management","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10754-024-09385-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Whether private healthcare providers should be encouraged over public providers remains unclear. On the one hand, because private providers are profit-driven, they are more motivated to compete for demand by enhancing quality if demand is elastic. However, because they are more motivated to maximize revenue, they may sacrifice quality to maximize profit. A crucial factor in determining whether private providers should be encouraged is the extent to which their quality exceeds or falls short of that of the public provider. This study, therefore, investigates whether the public and private differ in providing quality healthcare services using the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey. Our measure of healthcare quality is based on patient satisfaction level with nine healthcare services (cleanliness, waiting time, comfort and safety, consultation time, privacy, listening, explanation, treatment advice and confidentiality) provided by public and private healthcare facilities. We applied an instrumental variable approach to account for endogeneity issues related to the patient’s choice of healthcare provider. We find that private facility users have a higher probability of being very satisfied with “waiting time”, “consultation time”, “listening”, “cleanliness”, “comfort and safety”, “confidentiality”, and “privacy” than public users, thus suggesting that private facilities provide better service than public. We thus recommend encouraging the private sector to enter the healthcare market. We also find that failing to account for endogeneity in provider choice when estimating the effect of healthcare facility ownership on healthcare service quality underestimates the effects.
期刊介绍:
The focus of the International Journal of Health Economics and Management is on health care systems and on the behavior of consumers, patients, and providers of such services. The links among management, public policy, payment, and performance are core topics of the relaunched journal. The demand for health care and its cost remain central concerns. Even as medical innovation allows providers to improve the lives of their patients, questions remain about how to efficiently deliver health care services, how to pay for it, and who should pay for it. These are central questions facing innovators, providers, and payers in the public and private sectors. One key to answering these questions is to understand how people choose among alternative arrangements, either in markets or through the political process. The choices made by healthcare managers concerning the organization and production of that care are also crucial. There is an important connection between the management of a health care system and its economic performance. The primary audience for this journal will be health economists and researchers in health management, along with the larger group of health services researchers. In addition, research and policy analysis reported in the journal should be of interest to health care providers, managers and policymakers, who need to know about the pressures facing insurers and governments, with consequences for regulation and mandates. The editors of the journal encourage submissions that analyze the behavior and interaction of the actors in health care, viz. consumers, providers, insurers, and governments. Preference will be given to contributions that combine theoretical with empirical work, evaluate conflicting findings, present new information, or compare experiences between countries and jurisdictions. In addition to conventional research articles, the journal will include specific subsections for shorter concise research findings and cont ributions to management and policy that provide important descriptive data or arguments about what policies follow from research findings. The composition of the editorial board is designed to cover the range of interest among economics and management researchers.Officially cited as: Int J Health Econ ManagFrom 2001 to 2014 the journal was published as International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics. (Articles published in Vol. 1-14 officially cited as: Int J Health Care Finance Econ)