IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/yor/hectdg/22-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Static regulation and technological change: Prescribing cost-effective treatments under financial constraints in the English NHS

Author

Listed:
  • Dimitrova, V.;
  • Sameen, H.;

Abstract

Despite the long-term benefits of new health technologies, their optimal adoption may be impeded by the financial constraints of a public health system. In this paper we assess whether financially constrained hospital trusts ration cost-effective but expensive innovative treatments. Given financial pressures, exogenous to small disease populations, accumulated debt may prevent optimal prescribing. In such circumstances, financially constrained hospital trusts may choose to ration the use of these treatments in the short-term, even though their prescribing may be a more efficient use of funds in the long-term. We consider two small disease populations of particular interest where recent innovative medicines have become available: hepatitis C and multiple sclerosis. Combining and analysing a novel panel dataset of 150 hospital trusts providing acute care in the United Kingdom, we find evidence of rationing new cost-effective treatments under financial constraints.

Suggested Citation

  • Dimitrova, V.; & Sameen, H.;, 2022. "Static regulation and technological change: Prescribing cost-effective treatments under financial constraints in the English NHS," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 22/15, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    • Handle: RePEc:yor:hectdg:22/15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.york.ac.uk/media/economics/documents/hedg/workingpapers/2022/2215.pdf
    File Function: Main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, Soren T. & Laxminarayan, Ramanan & Salant, Stephen W., 2012. "Diversify or focus? Spending to combat infectious diseases when budgets are tight," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 658-675.
    2. Duggan, Mark, 2005. "Do new prescription drugs pay for themselves?: The case of second-generation antipsychotics," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-31, January.
    3. Martin, Stephen & Rice, Nigel & Smith, Peter C., 2008. "Does health care spending improve health outcomes? Evidence from English programme budgeting data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 826-842, July.
    4. Amanda Starc & Robert J Town, 2020. "Externalities and Benefit Design in Health Insurance," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(6), pages 2827-2858.
    5. Burau, Viola & Dahl, Hanne Marlene & Jensen, Lotte Groth & Lou, Stina, 2018. "Beyond Activity Based Funding. An experiment in Denmark," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(7), pages 714-721.
    6. J. Lundkvist, 2002. "Pricing and reimbursement of drugs in Sweden," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 3(1), pages 66-70, March.
    7. de Meijer, Claudine & O’Donnell, Owen & Koopmanschap, Marc & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2013. "Health expenditure growth: Looking beyond the average through decomposition of the full distribution," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 88-105.
    8. Idaira Rodriguez Santana & María José Aragón & Nigel Rice & Anne Rosemary Mason, 2020. "Trends in and drivers of healthcare expenditure in the English NHS: a retrospective analysis," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    9. Schmitz, Hendrik, 2013. "Practice budgets and the patient mix of physicians – The effect of a remuneration system reform on health care utilisation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1240-1249.
    10. Amy Finkelstein, 2004. "Static and Dynamic Effects of Health Policy: Evidence from the Vaccine Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 527-564.
    11. Lin, Haizhen & Sacks, Daniel W., 2019. "Intertemporal substitution in health care demand: Evidence from the RAND Health Insurance Experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 29-43.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Margaret K. Kyle, 2019. "The Alignment of Innovation Policy and Social Welfare: Evidence from Pharmaceuticals," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 20, pages 95-123, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Frankovic, Ivan & Kuhn, Michael, 2023. "Health insurance, endogenous medical progress, health expenditure growth, and welfare," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    3. Frankovic, Ivan & Kuhn, Michael, 2018. "Health insurance, endogenous medical progress, and health expenditure growth," ECON WPS - Working Papers in Economic Theory and Policy 01/2018, TU Wien, Institute of Statistics and Mathematical Methods in Economics, Economics Research Unit.
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Amy Finkelstein, 2008. "Input and Technology Choices in Regulated Industries: Evidence from the Health Care Sector," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 837-880, October.
    5. Alberto Galasso & Hong Luo, 2018. "Punishing Robots: Issues in the Economics of Tort Liability and Innovation in Artificial Intelligence," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 493-504, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Goodkin-Gold, Matthew & Kremer, Michael & Snyder, Christopher M. & Williams, Heidi, 2022. "Optimal vaccine subsidies for endemic diseases," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    7. Basu, Anirban & Jena, Anupam B. & Philipson, Tomas J., 2011. "The impact of comparative effectiveness research on health and health care spending," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 695-706, July.
    8. Dalsgaard, Søren & Nielsen, Helena Skyt & Simonsen, Marianne, 2014. "Consequences of ADHD medication use for children's outcomes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 137-151.
    9. Mayank Aggarwal & Anindya S. Chakrabarti & Chirantan Chatterjee, 2023. "Movies, stigma and choice: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(5), pages 1019-1039, May.
    10. Gamba, Simona & Magazzini, Laura & Pertile, Paolo, 2021. "R&D and market size: Who benefits from orphan drug legislation?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    11. Branstetter, Lee & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Higgins, Matthew J., 2022. "Generic competition and the incentives for early-stage pharmaceutical innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    12. Michele Fioretti & Hongming Wang, 2023. "Performance Pay in Insurance Markets: Evidence from Medicare," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(5), pages 1128-1144, September.
    13. Braendle, Thomas & Colombier, Carsten, 2020. "Budgetary targets as cost-containment measure in the Swiss healthcare system? Lessons from abroad," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(6), pages 605-614.
    14. Åsa Johansson, 2016. "Public Finance, Economic Growth and Inequality: A Survey of the Evidence," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1346, OECD Publishing.
    15. Jeffrey Clemens & Joshua D. Gottlieb & Jeffrey Hicks, 2021. "How Would Medicare for All Affect Health System Capacity? Evidence from Medicare for Some," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(1), pages 225-262.
    16. Nicholas Bagley & Benjamin Berger & Amitabh Chandra & Craig Garthwaite & Ariel D. Stern, 2018. "The Orphan Drug Act at 35: Observations and an Outlook for the Twenty-First Century," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19, pages 97-137, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Ralph Koijen & Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh, 2018. "Financing the War on Cancer," NBER Working Papers 24730, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Muzhe Yang & Hsien-Ming Lien & Shin-Yi Chou, 2014. "Is There A Physician Peer Effect? Evidence From New Drug Prescriptions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(1), pages 116-137, January.
    19. Siverskog, Jonathan & Henriksson, Martin, 2022. "The health cost of reducing hospital bed capacity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    20. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    healthcare budgets; cost-effectiveness; prescribing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
    • H51 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and 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:yor:hectdg:22/15. 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: Jane Rawlings (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deyoruk.html .

    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.