Dedicated Doctors: Public and Private Provision of Health Care with Altruistic Physicians

J. Delfgaauw
{"title":"Dedicated Doctors: Public and Private Provision of Health Care with Altruistic Physicians","authors":"J. Delfgaauw","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.958693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Physicians are supposed to serve patients' interests, but some are more inclined to do so than others. This paper studies how the system of health care provision affects the allocation of patients to physicians when physicians differ in altruism. We show that allowing for private provision of health care, parallel to (free) treatment in a National Health Service, benefits all patients. It enables rich patients to obtain higher quality treatment in the private sector. Because the altruistic physicians infer that in their absence, NHS patients receive lower treatment quality than private sector patients, they optimally decide to work in the NHS. Hence, after allowing for private provision, the remaining (relatively poor) NHS patients are more likely to receive the superior treatment provided by altruistic physicians. We also show, however, that allowing physicians to moonlight, i.e. to operate in both the NHS and the private sector simultaneously, nullifies part of these beneficial effects for the poorest patients.","PeriodicalId":73765,"journal":{"name":"Journal of health care law & policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"32","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of health care law & policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.958693","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

Abstract

Physicians are supposed to serve patients' interests, but some are more inclined to do so than others. This paper studies how the system of health care provision affects the allocation of patients to physicians when physicians differ in altruism. We show that allowing for private provision of health care, parallel to (free) treatment in a National Health Service, benefits all patients. It enables rich patients to obtain higher quality treatment in the private sector. Because the altruistic physicians infer that in their absence, NHS patients receive lower treatment quality than private sector patients, they optimally decide to work in the NHS. Hence, after allowing for private provision, the remaining (relatively poor) NHS patients are more likely to receive the superior treatment provided by altruistic physicians. We also show, however, that allowing physicians to moonlight, i.e. to operate in both the NHS and the private sector simultaneously, nullifies part of these beneficial effects for the poorest patients.
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
敬业的医生:公共和私人提供的医疗保健与无私的医生
医生应该为病人的利益服务,但有些人比其他人更倾向于这样做。本文研究了当医生的利他主义不同时,医疗保健制度如何影响病人分配给医生。我们表明,允许私人提供医疗保健,与国民保健服务(免费)治疗平行,使所有患者受益。它使富有的病人能够在私营部门获得更高质量的治疗。因为利他主义的医生推断,在他们缺席的情况下,NHS患者接受的治疗质量低于私营部门患者,他们最理想地决定在NHS工作。因此,在允许私人提供后,剩下的(相对贫穷的)NHS患者更有可能接受无私的医生提供的优质治疗。然而,我们也表明,允许医生兼职,即同时在NHS和私营部门工作,对最贫穷的病人来说,这些有益的影响部分无效。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
When Not to Ask: A Defense of Choice-Masking Nudges in Medical Research. REFUTING THE RIGHT NOT TO KNOW. FAIR BENEFITS AND ITS CRITICS: WHO IS RIGHT? DO ETHICS DEMAND EVALUATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH LAWS? SHIFTING SCIENTIFIC SANDS AND THE CASE OF YOUTH SPORTS-RELATED TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY LAWS. Fragmentation in Mental Health Benefits and Services: A Preliminary Examination into Consumption and Outcomes
×
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