医学影像的过度使用和付款-提供者整合的影响:来自芬兰的准实验证据。

IF 2.7 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Konsta Lavaste
{"title":"医学影像的过度使用和付款-提供者整合的影响:来自芬兰的准实验证据。","authors":"Konsta Lavaste","doi":"10.1186/s13561-025-00592-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Healthcare expenditures have risen in middle- and high-income countries. One of the potential contributors is the overuse of diagnostics. I explore whether medical imaging is overused when privately owned clinics in Finland treat patients with voluntary private health insurance (VPHI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>I employ administrative insurance claims data from a major Finnish insurance company, covering 2016-2019, and exploit two market entries of clinics owned by the company in 2017. The underlying assumption is that the insurance company's own clinics had weaker incentives to overuse imaging than other privately owned clinics because the payer and the provider belonged to the same entity. I identify the overuse using the staggered difference-in-differences (DID) strategy, in which I consider patients from cities with a market entry as the treatment group and compare them to patients in other similar cities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>I find that the market entries decreased the use of radiography and ultrasound imaging in the treatment of VPHI policyholders, suggesting that private clinics overused these imaging technologies. The more expensive computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were, however, not overused.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results show that private clinics in Finland overused some imaging technologies when treating VPHI policyholders. The extent and magnitude of overuse can, however, vary considerably between imaging technologies and medical ailments.</p>","PeriodicalId":46936,"journal":{"name":"Health Economics Review","volume":"15 1","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11776152/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Overuse of medical imaging and effects of payer-provider integration: quasi-experimental evidence from Finland.\",\"authors\":\"Konsta Lavaste\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13561-025-00592-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Healthcare expenditures have risen in middle- and high-income countries. One of the potential contributors is the overuse of diagnostics. I explore whether medical imaging is overused when privately owned clinics in Finland treat patients with voluntary private health insurance (VPHI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>I employ administrative insurance claims data from a major Finnish insurance company, covering 2016-2019, and exploit two market entries of clinics owned by the company in 2017. The underlying assumption is that the insurance company's own clinics had weaker incentives to overuse imaging than other privately owned clinics because the payer and the provider belonged to the same entity. I identify the overuse using the staggered difference-in-differences (DID) strategy, in which I consider patients from cities with a market entry as the treatment group and compare them to patients in other similar cities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>I find that the market entries decreased the use of radiography and ultrasound imaging in the treatment of VPHI policyholders, suggesting that private clinics overused these imaging technologies. The more expensive computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were, however, not overused.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results show that private clinics in Finland overused some imaging technologies when treating VPHI policyholders. The extent and magnitude of overuse can, however, vary considerably between imaging technologies and medical ailments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46936,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Economics Review\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11776152/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Economics Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-025-00592-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-025-00592-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:中等收入和高收入国家的医疗支出有所上升。其中一个潜在的因素是过度使用诊断。我探讨了当芬兰的私人诊所用自愿私人健康保险(VPHI)治疗患者时,医学成像是否被过度使用。方法:采用芬兰一家大型保险公司2016-2019年的行政保险理赔数据,并利用该公司2017年两次进入市场的诊所。潜在的假设是,保险公司自己的诊所比其他私人诊所有更弱的动机过度使用成像,因为付款人和提供者属于同一个实体。我使用交错差分差分(DID)策略来识别过度使用,在该策略中,我将来自市场进入城市的患者作为治疗组,并将他们与其他类似城市的患者进行比较。结果:我发现市场的进入减少了在VPHI投保人治疗中使用x线和超声成像,这表明私人诊所过度使用这些成像技术。然而,较为昂贵的计算机断层扫描(CT)和磁共振成像(MRI)并没有被过度使用。结论:结果表明芬兰私人诊所在治疗VPHI投保人时过度使用某些成像技术。然而,过度使用的程度和程度在成像技术和医学疾病之间可能存在很大差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Overuse of medical imaging and effects of payer-provider integration: quasi-experimental evidence from Finland.

Background: Healthcare expenditures have risen in middle- and high-income countries. One of the potential contributors is the overuse of diagnostics. I explore whether medical imaging is overused when privately owned clinics in Finland treat patients with voluntary private health insurance (VPHI).

Methods: I employ administrative insurance claims data from a major Finnish insurance company, covering 2016-2019, and exploit two market entries of clinics owned by the company in 2017. The underlying assumption is that the insurance company's own clinics had weaker incentives to overuse imaging than other privately owned clinics because the payer and the provider belonged to the same entity. I identify the overuse using the staggered difference-in-differences (DID) strategy, in which I consider patients from cities with a market entry as the treatment group and compare them to patients in other similar cities.

Results: I find that the market entries decreased the use of radiography and ultrasound imaging in the treatment of VPHI policyholders, suggesting that private clinics overused these imaging technologies. The more expensive computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were, however, not overused.

Conclusions: The results show that private clinics in Finland overused some imaging technologies when treating VPHI policyholders. The extent and magnitude of overuse can, however, vary considerably between imaging technologies and medical ailments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.20%
发文量
59
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Economics Review is an international high-quality journal covering all fields of Health Economics. A broad range of theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy with a health economic focus will be considered for publication. Its scope includes macro- and microeconomics of health care financing, health insurance and reimbursement as well as health economic evaluation, health services research and health policy analysis. Further research topics are the individual and institutional aspects of health care management and the growing importance of health care in developing countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信