Regional regulators in health care service under quality competition: A game theoretical model

An analysis of a rural hospital's investment decision under different payment systems

From an economic perspective, large investments in medical equipment are justifiable only when many patients benefit. Although rural hospitals play a crucial role locally, the treatments they can offer are limited. In this study, I characterize investment level that maximizes the total surplus, encompassing patients' welfare and producer surplus, and subtracting treatment costs. Specifically, I account for economic externalities generated by the investment in the rural hospital and for different utility losses that patients suffer when they cannot be treated locally. I demonstrate that the optimal investment level can be implemented if the Health Authority has the power to set specific prices for each disease. Additionally, I explore a decentralized situation wherein the investment decision lies with the rural hospital manager, and the Health Authority can only make a discrete decision between two payment systems: Fee-for-service, which covers all treatment costs, or Diagnosis-Related-Groups, which reimburses a price per patient based on the overall average cost. I find that the Diagnosis-Related-Groups system outperforms the Fee-for-service in terms of total surplus when the treatment cost at the rural hospital is lower. However, when the rural hospital has higher costs and the Health Authority seeks to incentivize investment, the Fee-for-service system is superior.

On the bright side of market concentration in a mixed-oligopoly healthcare industry

We describe the healthcare industry as a mixed oligopoly, where a public and two private providers compete, and examine the effects of a merger between the two private healthcare providers on prices, quality, and welfare. When the price and (eventually) quality of the public provider are regulated, the cost synergies required for the merger to increase consumer welfare are less significant than in a setting with only profit-maximizing providers. When, instead, the public provider can adjust its policy to the rivals' behavior and maximizes a weighted sum of profits and consumer surplus (i.e., it has 'semi-altruistic' preferences), the merger is consumer surplus increasing if the public provider is sufficiently altruist, in some cases even absent efficiencies. These results suggest that ignoring the role and objectives of the public sector in the healthcare industry may lead agencies to reject mergers that, while would decrease consumer welfare in fully privatized industries, would increase it in mixed oligopolies.

Optimal information disclosure strategy in the primary healthcare service market: From the perspective of signaling theory

The promotion of general practitioner (GP) contract service is one of the key components of China's healthcare reform. We consider GPs providing primary health services with private competency information over two periods, where patients decide when to sign. Two types of GPs are considered: those with higher and lower competency. Under asymmetric information, to spur the patients' incentive to sign, the GPs can move to offer competency disclosure schemes to patients, for example, separating or pooling, through which true competency information is revealed, respectively. We investigate three scenarios, which are referred to as "separating-separating," "pooling-separating," and "pooling-pooling." The results of the three scenarios yield intriguing insights into the impact of the GP's competency disclosure decisions. Findings include that GPs prefer the "pooling-separating" strategy, but patients prefer "separating-separating." Besides, an extremely low cure rate may enable GPs to conceal some competency information. Furthermore, low-competency GPs may exaggerate their competency level for profit, but greater efforts in disclosing competency information may result in diminished benefits. Therefore, to promote the services of GPs, the core is always to improve GPs' competency.

Readmission treatment price and product quality in the hospital sector

In this paper, we study the effect of readmission treatment payment in a dynamic framework characterised by competition among hospitals and sluggish beliefs of patients concerning the service quality. We find that the effect of readmission treatment payment depends on the interplay between the effect of quality in lowering readmissions and its effect on future demand. When the readmission occurrence strongly depends on the service quality, the higher the readmission treatment payment for hospitals, the lower the incentive to provide quality. Instead, when readmission depends barely on quality, the readmission payment acts as the treatment price for first admissions, and thus it reinforces the incentive to provide quality. We also show that the detrimental effect of readmission payments on quality are fed by a high degree of demand sluggishness, that is, by situation where current quality has modest effect on future demand changes. Our findings are robust to different equilibrium concepts of the differential game (i.e., open-loop and state-feedback). The results suggest that a discounted regulated price for readmission can be an effective (and cost-free) policy tool to improve health care quality, especially when the market is characterised by sluggish beliefs about quality.