{"title":"Waiting Time Prioritisation for Public and Private Providers: Evidence From Hip Replacement Surgery","authors":"Panos Kasteridis, Luigi Siciliani, Peter Sivey","doi":"10.1002/hec.70140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Waiting times for planned health care treatments have been increasing in England and other OECD countries. One policy to reduce the impact of waiting times on patients' health is for doctors to prioritise patients according to their health status. This study tests the extent to which publicly-funded patients in poorer health are prioritised on the list, and whether prioritisation differs between public and private providers. We use hospital administrative data in 2015–2021 on hip replacements in England. Our results provide evidence of inpatient waiting-time prioritisation (from specialist addition to list to admission for surgery) based on pre-operative health with a difference of at least 15 days between patients with lowest and highest pre-operative health. The gradient becomes steeper as waiting times increase, and much steeper during COVID-19. While outpatient waiting times (from referral to specialist visit) comprise a substantial proportion of total time waited (inpatient plus outpatient), we find limited evidence of outpatient waiting time prioritisation. Differences in inpatient waiting-time prioritisation between public and private providers are mostly due to different casemix and shorter average waiting times by private providers. We also simulate the effect of prioritisation policies that reduce inpatient waiting times for patients with low pre-operative health by 20% while simultaneously increasing it for those with high pre-operative health. We find that these policies could generate health gains of 183 QALYs in a given year. We conclude that there is scope for improving prioritisation of patients on the waiting list.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":"35 11","pages":"1744-1763"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hec.70140","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.70140","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Waiting times for planned health care treatments have been increasing in England and other OECD countries. One policy to reduce the impact of waiting times on patients' health is for doctors to prioritise patients according to their health status. This study tests the extent to which publicly-funded patients in poorer health are prioritised on the list, and whether prioritisation differs between public and private providers. We use hospital administrative data in 2015–2021 on hip replacements in England. Our results provide evidence of inpatient waiting-time prioritisation (from specialist addition to list to admission for surgery) based on pre-operative health with a difference of at least 15 days between patients with lowest and highest pre-operative health. The gradient becomes steeper as waiting times increase, and much steeper during COVID-19. While outpatient waiting times (from referral to specialist visit) comprise a substantial proportion of total time waited (inpatient plus outpatient), we find limited evidence of outpatient waiting time prioritisation. Differences in inpatient waiting-time prioritisation between public and private providers are mostly due to different casemix and shorter average waiting times by private providers. We also simulate the effect of prioritisation policies that reduce inpatient waiting times for patients with low pre-operative health by 20% while simultaneously increasing it for those with high pre-operative health. We find that these policies could generate health gains of 183 QALYs in a given year. We conclude that there is scope for improving prioritisation of patients on the waiting list.
期刊介绍:
This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems.
Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses.
Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.