IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/amjhec/v1y2015i1p82-100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expanding Patients' Property Rights in Their Medical Records

Author

Listed:
  • Laurence C. Baker

    (Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University, and the National Bureau of Economic Research)

  • M. Kate Bundorf

    (Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University, and the National Bureau of Economic Research)

  • Daniel P. Kessler

    (Graduate School of Business, Law School, and Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the National Bureau of Economic Research)

Abstract

Although doctors and hospitals own their patients' medical records, state and federal laws require that they provide patients with a copy at “reasonable cost.” We examine the effects of state laws that cap the fees that doctors and hospitals are allowed to charge patients for a copy of their records. We test whether these laws affected patients' propensity to switch doctors and the prices of new- and existing-patient visits. We also examine the effect of laws on hospitals' adoption of electronic medical record (EMR) systems. We find that patients from states adopting caps on copy fees were significantly more likely to switch doctors, and that hospitals in states adopting caps were significantly more likely to install an EMR. We also find that laws did not have a systematic, significant effect on prices. © 2015 American Society of Health Economists and Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Suggested Citation

  • Laurence C. Baker & M. Kate Bundorf & Daniel P. Kessler, 2015. "Expanding Patients' Property Rights in Their Medical Records," American Journal of Health Economics, MIT Press, vol. 1(1), pages 82-100, Winter.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:amjhec:v:1:y:2015:i:1:p:82-100
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/AJHE_a_00004
    File Function: link to full text PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine M. DesRoches & Dustin Charles & Michael F. Furukawa & Maulik S. Joshi & Peter Kralovec & Farzad Mostashari & Chantal Worzala Ashish K. Jha, "undated". "Adoption of Electronic Health Records Grows Rapidly, But Fewer Than Half of US Hospitals had at Least a Basic System in 2012," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 0d8d890b940d4e0f835fa1ade, Mathematica Policy Research.
    2. Amalia R. Miller & Catherine Tucker, 2009. "Privacy Protection and Technology Diffusion: The Case of Electronic Medical Records," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(7), pages 1077-1093, July.
    3. repec:mpr:mprres:7826 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Daniel P. Kessler, 2011. "Evaluating the Medical Malpractice System and Options for Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 93-110, Spring.
    5. Cogan John F & Hubbard R. Glenn & Kessler Daniel, 2010. "The Effect of Massachusetts' Health Reform on Employer-Sponsored Insurance Premiums," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-8, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Seth Freedman & Haizhen Lin & Jeffrey Prince, 2018. "Does Competition Lead to Agglomeration or Dispersion in EMR Vendor Decisions?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 53(1), pages 57-79, August.
    2. Amalia R. Miller, 2023. "Privacy of Digital Health Information," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Privacy, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Rachel Soloveichik, 2024. "Private Funding of “Free” Data: A Theoretical Framework," BEA Papers 0125, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laurence C. Baker & Kate Bundorf & Daniel Kessler, 2014. "Expanding Patients' Property Rights In Their Medical Records," NBER Working Papers 20565, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Sam Ransbotham & Eric M. Overby & Michael C. Jernigan, 2021. "Electronic Trace Data and Legal Outcomes: The Effect of Electronic Medical Records on Malpractice Claim Resolution Time," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(7), pages 4341-4361, July.
    3. Arora, Ashish & Forman, Chris & Nandkumar, Anand & Telang, Rahul, 2010. "Competition and patching of security vulnerabilities: An empirical analysis," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 164-177, May.
    4. Amalia R. Miller & Catherine Tucker, 2017. "Frontiers of Health Policy: Digital Data and Personalized Medicine," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(1), pages 49-75.
    5. Zhan Wang & Niying Li & Mengsi Jiang & Keith Dear & Chee-Ruey Hsieh, 2017. "Records of medical malpractice litigation: A potential indicator of healthcare quality in China," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-144, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    6. Yassine Lefouili & Leonardo Madio & Ying Lei Toh, 2024. "Privacy Regulation and Quality‐Enhancing Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 662-684, June.
    7. Yu-Kai Lin & Mingfeng Lin & Hsinchun Chen, 2019. "Do Electronic Health Records Affect Quality of Care? Evidence from the HITECH Act," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 306-318, March.
    8. Nadine Rozenkranz & Andreas Eckhardt & Mirko Kühne & Christoph Rosenkranz, 2013. "Health Information on the Internet," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(4), pages 259-274, August.
    9. Andrew Friedson & Thomas Kniesner, 2012. "Losers and losers: Some demographics of medical malpractice tort reforms," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 115-133, October.
    10. Catherine E. Tucker, 2023. "The Economics of Privacy: An Agenda," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Privacy, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Amalia R. Miller & Catherine E. Tucker, 2011. "Can Health Care Information Technology Save Babies?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(2), pages 289-324.
    12. Sebastian Panthöfer, 2022. "Do doctors prescribe antibiotics out of fear of malpractice?," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 340-381, June.
    13. Jin-Hyuk Kim & Liad Wagman, 2015. "Screening incentives and privacy protection in financial markets: a theoretical and empirical analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(1), pages 1-22, March.
    14. Fabrizio, Kira R. & Hawn, Olga, 2013. "Enabling diffusion: How complementary inputs moderate the response to environmental policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1099-1111.
    15. Ian A. MacKenzie & Markus Ohndorf, 2016. "Caps on Coasean transfers," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 68(2), pages 566-584.
    16. Ravi Bapna & Jui Ramaprasad & Galit Shmueli & Akhmed Umyarov, 2016. "One-Way Mirrors in Online Dating: A Randomized Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3100-3122, November.
    17. Lesley Chiou & Catherine Tucker, 2017. "Search Engines and Data Retention: Implications for Privacy and Antitrust," NBER Working Papers 23815, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Gautam Gowrisankaran & Keith A. Joiner & Jianjing Lin, 2016. "How do Hospitals Respond to Payment Incentives?," NBER Working Papers 22873, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Ari Bronsoler & John Van Reenen & Joseph Doyle, 2022. "The Impact of Health Information and Communication Technology on Clinical Quality, Productivity, and Workers," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 23-46, August.
    20. Idris Adjerid & Alessandro Acquisti & Rahul Telang & Rema Padman & Julia Adler-Milstein, 2016. "The Impact of Privacy Regulation and Technology Incentives: The Case of Health Information Exchanges," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(4), pages 1042-1063, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EMR; medical records; state;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:tpr:amjhec:v:1:y:2015:i:1:p:82-100. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: The MIT Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    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.