IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v21y2012i4p428-443.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does managed care affect the diffusion of psychotropic medications?

Author

Listed:
  • Marisa E. Domino

Abstract

Newer technologies to treat many mental illnesses have shown substantial heterogeneity in diffusion rates across states. In this paper, I investigate whether variation in the level of managed care penetration is associated with changes in state‐level diffusion of three newer classes of psychotropic medications in fee‐for‐service Medicaid programs from 1991 to 2005. Three different types of managed care programs are examined: capitated managed care, any type of managed care and behavioral health carve‐outs. A fourth‐order polynomial fixed effect regression model is used to model the diffusion path of newer antidepressant and antipsychotic medications controlling for time‐varying state characteristics. Substantial differences are found in the diffusion paths by the degree of managed care use in each state Medicaid program. The largest effect is seen through spillover effects of capitated managed care programs; states with greater capitated managed care have greater initial shares of newer psychotropic medications. The influence of carve‐outs and of all types of managed care combined on the diffusion path was modest. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Marisa E. Domino, 2012. "Does managed care affect the diffusion of psychotropic medications?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(4), pages 428-443, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:21:y:2012:i:4:p:428-443
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.1723
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1723
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.1723?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pradeep Chintagunta & Renna Jiang & Ginger Jin, 2009. "Information, learning, and drug diffusion: The case of Cox-2 inhibitors," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 399-443, December.
    2. Peay, Marilyn Y. & Peay, Edmund R., 1994. "Innovation in high risk drug therapy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 39-52, July.
    3. Judith K. Hellerstein, 1998. "The Importance of the Physician in the Generic Versus Trade-Name Prescription Decision," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(1), pages 108-136, Spring.
    4. Dana Goldman & James P. Smith, 2005. "Socioeconomic Differences in the Adoption of New Medical Technologies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 234-237, May.
    5. Davina C. Ling & Ernst R. Berndt & Richard G. Frank, 2008. "Economic Incentives And Contracts: The Use Of Psychotropic Medications," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(1), pages 49-72, January.
    6. Meyerhoefer Chad D. & Zuvekas Samuel H, 2008. "The Shape of Demand: What Does It Tell Us about Direct-to-Consumer Marketing of Antidepressants?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 1-34, January.
    7. Ernst R. Berndt & Iain M. Cockburn & Douglas L. Cocks & Arnold M. Epstein & Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Is Price Inflation Different for the Elderly? An Empirical Analysis of Prescription Drugs," NBER Chapters, in: Frontiers in Health Policy Research, Volume 1, pages 33-76, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Jonathan Skinner & Douglas Staiger, 2007. "Technology Adoption from Hybrid Corn to Beta-Blockers," NBER Chapters, in: Hard-to-Measure Goods and Services: Essays in Honor of Zvi Griliches, pages 545-570, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Coscelli, Andrea & Shum, Matthew, 2004. "An empirical model of learning and patient spillovers in new drug entry," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 213-246, October.
    10. Sara Ellison Fisher & Iain Cockburn & Zvi Griliches & Jerry Hausman, 1997. "Characteristics of Demand for Pharmaceutical Products: An Examination of Four Cephalosporins," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(3), pages 426-446, Autumn.
    11. Stern, S. & Trajtenberg, M., 1998. "Empirical Implications of Physician Authority in Pharmaceutical Decisionmaking," Papers 24-98, Tel Aviv.
    12. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn & Emilie Rovito, 2006. "Five Facts You Need to Know About Technology Diffusion," NBER Working Papers 11928, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Phelps, Charles E., 2000. "Information diffusion and best practice adoption," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 223-264, Elsevier.
    14. Birgitte Andersen, 1999. "The hunt for S-shaped growth paths in technological innovation: a patent study," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 487-526.
    15. Jonathan Skinner & Douglas Staiger, 2015. "Technology Diffusion and Productivity Growth in Health Care," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(5), pages 951-964, December.
    16. Mas, Núria & Seinfeld, Janice, 2008. "Is managed care restraining the adoption of technology by hospitals?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 1026-1045, July.
    17. Marisa Elena Domino & David S. Salkever, 2003. "Price elasticity and pharmaceutical selection: the influence of managed care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(7), pages 565-586, July.
    18. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn & Emilie Rovito, 2008. "A new approach to measuring technology with an application to the shape of the diffusion curves," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 187-207, April.
    19. Minhi Hahn & Sehoon Park & Lakshman Krishnamurthi & Andris A. Zoltners, 1994. "Analysis of New Product Diffusion Using a Four-Segment Trial-Repeat Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 224-247.
    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. Katolik, Aleksandra & Oswald, Andrew J., 2017. "Antidepressants for Economists and Business-School Researchers: An Introduction and Review," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 71(4), pages 448-463.
    2. Katolik, Aleksandra & Oswald, Andrew J., 2017. "Antidepressants for Economists and Business-School Researchers: An Introduction and Review," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 338, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    3. Schmitz, Hendrik & Stroka, Magdalena A., 2013. "Health and the double burden of full-time work and informal care provision — Evidence from administrative data," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 305-322.
    4. Giuliano Masiero & Fabrizio Mazzonna & Olaf Verbeek, 2018. "What drives the rise of antidepressant consumption? Evidence from Switzerland," IdEP Economic Papers 1801, USI Università della Svizzera italiana.

    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. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn, 2010. "An Exploration of Technology Diffusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2031-2059, December.
    2. Jennifer Rice, 2009. "The influence of managed care on generic prescribing rates: an analysis of HMO physicians," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(7), pages 787-796.
    3. Dalen Dag Morten & Locatelli Marilena & Sorisio Enrico & Strom Steinar, 2011. "A Probability Approach to Pharmaceutical Demand and Price Setting: Does the Identity of the Third-Party Payer Matters for Prescribing Doctors?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201110, University of Turin.
    4. Comin, Diego & Mestieri, Martí, 2014. "Technology Diffusion: Measurement, Causes, and Consequences," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 2, pages 565-622, Elsevier.
    5. Robert S. Huckman, 2003. "The Utilization of Competing Technologies Within the Firm: Evidence from Cardiac Procedures," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(5), pages 599-617, May.
    6. Ching, Andrew T., 2010. "Consumer learning and heterogeneity: Dynamics of demand for prescription drugs after patent expiration," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 619-638, November.
    7. Guofang Huang & Matthew Shum & Wei Tan, 2019. "Is pharmaceutical detailing informative? Evidence from contraindicated drug prescriptions," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 135-160, June.
    8. Dalen, Dag Morten & Sorisio, Enrico & Strøm, Steinar, 2009. "Choosing among Competing Blockbusters: Does the Identity of the Third-party Payer Matter for Prescribing Doctors?," Memorandum 10/2009, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    9. Anna A. Levine Taub & Anton Kolotilin & Robert S. Gibbons & Ernst R. Berndt, 2011. "The Diversity of Concentrated Prescribing Behavior: An Application to Antipsychotics," NBER Working Papers 16823, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Jie Bai, 2016. "Melons as Lemons: Asymmetric Information, Consumer Learning and Seller Reputation," Natural Field Experiments 00540, The Field Experiments Website.
    11. Comin, Diego & Rode, Johannes, 2013. "From Green Users to Green Voters," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 63678, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    12. Brekke, Kurt R. & Holmas, Tor Helge & Straume, Odd Rune, 2011. "Reference pricing, competition, and pharmaceutical expenditures: Theory and evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 624-638.
    13. Paraponaris, A. & Verger, P. & Desquins, B. & Villani, P. & Bouvenot, G. & Rochaix, L. & Gourheux, J. C. & Moatti, J. P. AU -, 2004. "Delivering generics without regulatory incentives?: Empirical evidence from French general practitioners about willingness to prescribe international non-proprietary names," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 23-32, October.
    14. Sacks, Daniel W., 2018. "Why do HMOs spend less? Patient selection, physician price sensitivity, and prices," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 146-161.
    15. Jürgen Maurer & Katherine M. Harris, 2016. "Learning to Trust Flu Shots: Quasi‐Experimental Evidence from the 2009 Swine Flu Pandemic," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(9), pages 1148-1162, September.
    16. Jonathan Skinner & Douglas Staiger, 2007. "Technology Adoption from Hybrid Corn to Beta-Blockers," NBER Chapters, in: Hard-to-Measure Goods and Services: Essays in Honor of Zvi Griliches, pages 545-570, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Aysegul Timur & Gabriel Picone & Jeffrey DeSimone, 2011. "Has the European union achieved a single pharmaceutical market?," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 223-244, December.
    18. Javitt, Jonathan C. & Rebitzer, James B. & Reisman, Lonny, 2008. "Information technology and medical missteps: Evidence from a randomized trial," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 585-602, May.
    19. Toshiaki Iizuka, 2012. "Physician Agency and Adoption of Generic Pharmaceuticals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2826-2858, October.
    20. Pierre Azoulay, 2002. "Do Pharmaceutical Sales Respond to Scientific Evidence?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), pages 551-594, December.

    More about this item

    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:wly:hlthec:v:21:y:2012:i:4:p:428-443. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.