政府采购的扭曲效应:来自医疗补助处方药采购的证据

M. Duggan, Fiona M. Scott Morton
{"title":"政府采购的扭曲效应:来自医疗补助处方药采购的证据","authors":"M. Duggan, Fiona M. Scott Morton","doi":"10.1093/QJE/121.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2003 the federal-state Medicaid program provided prescription drug coverage to more than 50 million people. To determine the price that it will pay for each drug, Medicaid uses the average private sector price. When Medicaid is a large part of the demand for a drug, this creates an incentive for its maker to increase prices for other health care consumers. Using drug utilization and expenditure data for the top 200 drugs in 1997 and in 2002, we investigate the relationship between the Medicaid market share (MMS) and the average price of a prescription. Our estimates imply that a 10-percentage-point increase in the MMS is associated with a 7 to 10 percent increase in the average price of a prescription. In addition, the Medicaid rules increase a firm's incentive to introduce new versions of a drug in order to raise price. We find empirical evidence that firms producing newer drugs with larger sales to Medicaid are more likely to introduce new versions. Taken together, our findings suggest that government procurement rules can alter equilibrium price and product proliferation in the private sector.","PeriodicalId":73765,"journal":{"name":"Journal of health care law & policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"141","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Distortionary Effects of Government Procurement: Evidence from Medicaid Prescription Drug Purchasing\",\"authors\":\"M. Duggan, Fiona M. Scott Morton\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/QJE/121.1.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 2003 the federal-state Medicaid program provided prescription drug coverage to more than 50 million people. To determine the price that it will pay for each drug, Medicaid uses the average private sector price. When Medicaid is a large part of the demand for a drug, this creates an incentive for its maker to increase prices for other health care consumers. Using drug utilization and expenditure data for the top 200 drugs in 1997 and in 2002, we investigate the relationship between the Medicaid market share (MMS) and the average price of a prescription. Our estimates imply that a 10-percentage-point increase in the MMS is associated with a 7 to 10 percent increase in the average price of a prescription. In addition, the Medicaid rules increase a firm's incentive to introduce new versions of a drug in order to raise price. We find empirical evidence that firms producing newer drugs with larger sales to Medicaid are more likely to introduce new versions. Taken together, our findings suggest that government procurement rules can alter equilibrium price and product proliferation in the private sector.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73765,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of health care law & policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"141\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of health care law & policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/QJE/121.1.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of health care law & policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/QJE/121.1.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 141

摘要

2003年,联邦-州医疗补助计划为5000多万人提供处方药保险。为了确定每种药物的价格,医疗补助使用的是私营部门的平均价格。当医疗补助计划是一种药物需求的很大一部分时,这就会刺激制造商提高其他医疗保健消费者的价格。本文利用1997年和2002年前200种药品的药物使用和支出数据,研究了医疗补助市场份额(MMS)与处方平均价格之间的关系。我们的估计表明,MMS每增加10个百分点,处方的平均价格就会增加7%到10%。此外,医疗补助计划的规定增加了制药公司为了提高价格而引进新药的动机。我们发现经验证据表明,生产对医疗补助销售较大的新药的公司更有可能推出新版本。综上所述,我们的研究结果表明,政府采购规则可以改变私营部门的均衡价格和产品扩散。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Distortionary Effects of Government Procurement: Evidence from Medicaid Prescription Drug Purchasing
In 2003 the federal-state Medicaid program provided prescription drug coverage to more than 50 million people. To determine the price that it will pay for each drug, Medicaid uses the average private sector price. When Medicaid is a large part of the demand for a drug, this creates an incentive for its maker to increase prices for other health care consumers. Using drug utilization and expenditure data for the top 200 drugs in 1997 and in 2002, we investigate the relationship between the Medicaid market share (MMS) and the average price of a prescription. Our estimates imply that a 10-percentage-point increase in the MMS is associated with a 7 to 10 percent increase in the average price of a prescription. In addition, the Medicaid rules increase a firm's incentive to introduce new versions of a drug in order to raise price. We find empirical evidence that firms producing newer drugs with larger sales to Medicaid are more likely to introduce new versions. Taken together, our findings suggest that government procurement rules can alter equilibrium price and product proliferation in the private sector.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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