IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v50y2000i3p407-418.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The "supply hypothesis" and medical practice variation in primary care: testing economic and clinical models of inter-practitioner variation

Author

Listed:
  • Davis, Peter
  • Gribben, Barry
  • Scott, Alastair
  • Lay-Yee, Roy

Abstract

Medical practice variation (MPV) is marked, apparently ubiquitous across the health sector, well documented, and continues to be a focus of professional and policy interest. MPV have stimulated two paths of investigation, one economic in emphasis and the other more clinical in orientation; while health economists have stressed the potential role of income incentives in medical decision-making, health services research has tended to emphasise clinical ambiguity as a factor in practitioner decisions. Both sets of explanations converge in an implicit "supply hypothesis" that posits contextual practitioner and practice attributes as influential in clinical decisions. Data on inter-practitioner variation are taken from a large and representative regional survey of general practitioners in New Zealand, a country in which unsubsidised fee-for-service is the predominant mode of remuneration in primary care. The paper assesses the impact on three important areas of clinical decision-making -- prescribing, test ordering, request for follow-up -- of three key conceptual dimensions -- income incentives, physician agency, and clinical ambiguity (operationalised as local doctor density, practitioner encounter initiation, and diagnostic uncertainty respectively). Predictions are made about inter-practitioner variations in the rate of clinical activity in the three areas. The results of the analysis using multi-level statistical techniques are: 1. the extent of competition -- local doctor density -- seems to have no effect on the pattern of clinical decision-making; 2. doctor-initiated visits are, if anything, associated with lower rates of intervention; 3. diagnostic uncertainty is associated with higher rates of investigations and follow-up, both of which have clinical plausibility; 4. there is no significant interaction effect between density and uncertainty. It is concluded that, for the clinical activities studied and for the practitioner attributes as operationalised in this investigation, a clinical, rather than an economic, model of practitioner decision-making provides a more plausible interpretation of inter-practitioner variation in rates of clinical activity in general practice. The "supply hypothesis" requires further analytical refinement and empirical assessment before it can be applied as a generic explanatory framework for MPV.

Suggested Citation

  • Davis, Peter & Gribben, Barry & Scott, Alastair & Lay-Yee, Roy, 2000. "The "supply hypothesis" and medical practice variation in primary care: testing economic and clinical models of inter-practitioner variation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 407-418, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:50:y:2000:i:3:p:407-418
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(99)00299-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pelletier-Fleury, Nathalie & Le Vaillant, Marc & Hebbrecht, Gilles & Boisnault, Philippe, 2007. "Determinants of preventive services in general practice: A multilevel approach in cardiovascular domain and vaccination in France," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(2-3), pages 218-227, May.
    2. Fontanella, Cynthia A. & Early, Theresa J. & Phillips, Gary, 2008. "Need or availability? Modeling aftercare decisions for psychiatrically hospitalized adolescents," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 758-773, July.
    3. Magali Dumontet & Carine Franc, 2015. "Gender differences in French GPs’ activity: the contribution of quantile regressions," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(4), pages 421-435, May.
    4. Julien Mousquès & Thomas Renaud & Olivier Scemama, 2008. "A refutation of the practice style hypothesis: the case of antibiotics prescription by French general practitioners for acute rhinopharyngitis," Working Papers DT18, IRDES institut for research and information in health economics, revised Oct 2008.
    5. M. Lippi Bruni & L. Nobilio & C. Ugolini, 2007. "Economic Incentives in General Practice: the Impact of Pay for Participation Programs on Diabetes Care," Working Papers 607, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    6. Matthew C. Harris & Lawrence M. Kessler & Matthew N. Murray & Beth Glenn, 2020. "Prescription Opioids and Labor Market Pains: The Effect of Schedule II Opioids on Labor Force Participation and Unemployment," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 55(4), pages 1319-1364.
    7. Grytten, Jostein & Sorensen, Rune, 2007. "Primary physician services--List size and primary physicians' service production," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 721-741, July.
    8. Joan Costa-Font & Francesco Moscone, 2009. "The impact of decentralization and inter-territorial interactions on Spanish health expenditure," Studies in Empirical Economics, in: Giuseppe Arbia & Badi H. Baltagi (ed.), Spatial Econometrics, pages 167-184, Springer.
    9. Kisalaya Basu & Maxwell Pak, 2017. "Will the Needs‐Based Planning of Health Human Resources Currently Undertaken in Several Countries Lead to Excess Supply and Inefficiency? Rejoinder," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(6), pages 822-824, June.
    10. Yiannakoulias, Nikolaos & Hill, Michael D. & Svenson, Lawrence W., 2009. "Geographic hierarchies of diagnostic practice style in cerebrovascular disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 1985-1992, June.
    11. Mousquès, Julien & Renaud, Thomas & Scemama, Olivier, 2010. "Is the "practice style" hypothesis relevant for general practitioners? An analysis of antibiotics prescription for acute rhinopharyngitis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1176-1184, April.
    12. Troels Kristensen & Kim Olsen & Henrik Schroll & Janus Thomsen & Anders Halling, 2014. "Association between fee-for-service expenditures and morbidity burden in primary care," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(6), pages 599-610, July.
    13. Grytten, Jostein & Sorensen, Rune, 2001. "Type of contract and supplier-induced demand for primary physicians in Norway," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 379-393, May.
    14. Wu, Bingxiao, 2019. "Physician agency in China: Evidence from a drug-percentage incentive scheme," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 72-89.
    15. Tinglong Dai & Shubhranshu Singh, 2020. "Conspicuous by Its Absence: Diagnostic Expert Testing Under Uncertainty," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(3), pages 540-563, May.
    16. Denzil G. Fiebig & Rosalie Viney & Stephanie Knox & Marion Haas & Deborah J. Street & Arne R. Hole & Edith Weisberg & Deborah Bateson, 2017. "Consideration Sets and Their Role in Modelling Doctor Recommendations About Contraceptives," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(1), pages 54-73, January.
    17. Mangham-Jefferies, Lindsay & Hanson, Kara & Mbacham, Wilfred & Onwujekwe, Obinna & Wiseman, Virginia, 2014. "What determines providers' stated preference for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 98-106.
    18. Viola Burau & Lotte Bøgh Andersen, 2014. "Professions and Professionals: Capturing the Changing Role of Expertise Through Theoretical Triangulation," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 264-293, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:50:y:2000:i:3:p:407-418. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.