What are the policy options for regulating private equity involvement in health care? A review of policies implemented or considered in seven high-income countries

Abstract

Over the past two decades, private equity investment in health care has increased substantially. Proponents argue that private equity can optimize and improve health services, while critics warn that the business model of these firms is not aligned with the social values of care delivery and has harmful consequences for health systems and patients. It remains unclear to what extent — and how — subnational, national and supranational governments have attempted to regulate this activity. The purpose of this study therefore was to identify examples of implemented and proposed policy options for regulating private equity activity within health care, with the goal of elucidating the policy options available to regulators. We conducted a narrative review to identify proposed or implemented policy instruments in selected high-income countries, grouping them by type using a conceptual framework based on the works of Milton Friedman and Avedis Donabedian. Our search identified several examples of proposed or implemented policy options for addressing private equity activity in the countries under review. Most of these intervention examples fall into the category of disclosure, while only one focused on regulation of outcomes. Our study suggests that while some countries have started to develop policy interventions to directly address the role of private equity in health care, other countries do not specifically regulate private equity activity.