nach oben

The European Journal of Health Economics

Erschienen in:

01.04.2014 | Original Paper

The effect of quality and socio-demographic variables on efficiency measures in primary health care

verfasst von: José Manuel Cordero Ferrera, Eva Crespo Cebada, Luis R. Murillo Zamorano

Erschienen in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Ausgabe 3/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

This paper aims to extend the literature on measuring efficiency in primary health care by considering the influence of quality indicators and environmental variables conjointly in a case study. In particular, environmental variables are represented by patients’ characteristics and quality indicators are based on technical aspects. In order to deal with both aspects, different extensions of data envelopment analysis (DEA) methodology are applied. Specifically, we use weight restrictions to ensure that the efficiency scores assigned to the evaluated units take quality data into account, and a four-stage model to identify which exogenous variables have impact on performance as well as to compute efficiency scores that incorporate this information explicitly. The results provide evidence in support of the importance of including information about both aspects in the analysis so that the efficiency measures obtained can be interpreted as an accurate reflection of performance.

An exception is Steinmann et al. [5], who provide a comprehensive review of efficiency studies in both hospitals and primary care services.

See [6‐8] for an overview of studies on the measurement of efficiency in the health sector.

See [26, 27] for details.

Our purpose is limited to provide practitioners and decision makers with a useful tool to perform an efficiency analysis of primary health care centres considering quality and quantitative indicators jointly. The setting of the exact value of weight restrictions should therefore be undertaken by highly qualified experts in order to preserve equity and fairness in the evaluation.

Slacks are potential improvements for inefficient units that are not accounted for in the DEA (radial) score. See Toffallis [36] for an illustrated definition of slacks.

The total number of PCCs in 2006 was 103, but 6 of them were excluded due to having missing data, while 3 were considered as outliers by the method developed by Johnson and McGinnis [40]. The main advantage of this method is that it fits better to the multi-stage approach adopted in our empirical analysis, since it avoids potential distortions that could arise if there are outliers among the units exhibiting particularly poor performance.

The health targets include the following items: population aged 0–14 entered in the register of vaccinations and correctly vaccinated; population aged over 15 entered in the register of adult vaccinations and correctly vaccinated against tetanus; population belonging to a risk group registered and correctly vaccinated against hepatitis B; population aged over 64 vaccinated against influenza; population aged 0–14 included in the dental health program; and female population included in the health program for early diagnosis of breast cancer.

Specifically, the questionnaire contains ten questions inquiring about the following items: the existence of a training plan for doctors, a stock list of medicines, an organisation chart in the centre, a monitoring plan for economic imbalances, a maintenance plan for the physical facilities, an informative guide about the services provided, accessibility for people with disabilities, a survey questionnaire designed to obtain information about the level of membership of medical staff in scientific associations and regular attendance of medical staff at conferences.

Adler and Yazhemsky [46] use a Monte Carlo simulation to compare the performance of the PCA approach with the variable reduction and demonstrate that the former provides more accurate results.

See [47, 48] for a detailed explanation of the procedure.

Following Banker [50], we tested the data for scale effects, finding that there are units operating at different scales. Moreover, the VRS assumption facilitates comparison with the constrained model, for which the status of returns to scale may undergo a change when weight restrictions are added [51].

Efficiency scores have been calculated using DEAP 2.1 software [52], which also estimates radial and non-radial slacks for each variable using a multi-stage process.

Table 5 reports the Spearman correlation coefficients among all the models specified and calculated in this study.

The correlation coefficients between all the pairs of these models are greater than 0.93 in every case (see Table 5).

We performed 1,000 iterations.

In this procedure, we take into account only those variables that have a significant effect on each slack.

Here the values of the population density variable (DENSITY) are the greatest of the entire sample and the values of ER, AGRIEMP and DR are notably lower than in rural areas.

Nunamaker, T.R.: Measuring routine nursing service efficiency: A comparison of cost per patient day and data envelopment analysis models. Health Serv. Res. 18, 183–205 (1983)PubMedCentralPubMed

Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E.: Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2(6), 429–444 (1978)CrossRef

Murillo-Zamorano, L.R., Petraglia, C.: Technical efficiency in primary health care: Does quality matter? Eur. J. Health Econ. 12, 115–125 (2011)

Cordero-Ferrera, J.M., Crespo-Cebada, E., Murillo-Zamorano, L.R.: Measuring technical efficiency in primary health care: The effect of exogenous variables on results. J. Med. Syst. 35(4), 545–554 (2011)

Steinmann, L., Dittrich, G., Karmann, A., Zweifel, P.: Measuring and comparing the (in)efficiency of German and Swiss hospitals. Eur. J. Health Econ. 5(3), 216–226 (2004)PubMedCrossRef

Hollingsworth, B.: Non-parametric and parametric applications measuring efficiency in health care. Health Care Manag. Sci. 6(4), 203–218 (2003)PubMedCrossRef

Hollingsworth, B.: The measurement of efficiency and productivity of health care delivery. Health Econ. 17, 1107–1128 (2008)PubMedCrossRef

Worthington, A.C.: Frontier efficiency measurement in health care: a review of empirical techniques and selected applications. Medical Care Res. Rev. 61(2), 135–170 (2004)CrossRef

Newhouse, J.: Toward a theory of non-profit institutions: An economic model of a hospital. Am. Econ. Rev. 60, 64–74 (1970)

10.

Lezzoni, L.: Risk adjustment for measuring health care outcomes, Ann Arbor. Heath Administration Press, Michigan (1994)

11.

Kontodimopoulos, N., Moschovakis, G., Aletras, V., Niakas, D.: The effect of environmental factors on technical and scale efficiency of primary health care providers in Greece. Cost Eff. Resour. Alloc. 5, 14 (2007). doi:10.1186/1478-7547-5-14 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

12.

Ramirez-Valdivia, M., Maturana, S., Salvo-Garrido, S.: A multiple stage approach for performance improvement of primary health care practice. J. Med. Syst. 35(5), 1015–1028 (2011)PubMedCrossRef

13.

Fried, H., Schmidt, S., Yaisawarng, S.: Incorporating the operating environment into a nonparametric measure of technical efficiency. J. Prod. Anal. 12, 249–267 (1999)CrossRef

14.

Cordero-Ferrera, J.M., Pedraja, F., Santín, D.: Enhancing the inclusion of non-discretionary inputs in DEA. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 61, 574–584 (2010)

15.

Ferrier, G., Valdmanis, V.: Rural hospital performance and its correlates. J. Prod. Anal. 7, 63–80 (1996)CrossRef

16.

Linna, M., Häkkinen, U., Linnakko, E.: An econometric study of costs of teaching and research in finnish hospitals. Health Econ. 7(4), 291–305 (1998)PubMedCrossRef

17.

Arocena, P., García-Prado, A.: Accounting for quality in the measurement of hospital performance: Evidence from Costa Rica. Health Econ. 16, 667–685 (2007)PubMedCrossRef

18.

Shimshak, D., Lenard, M.: A two-model approach to measuring operating and quality efficiency with DEA. INFOR 45(3), 143–151 (2007)

19.

Shimshak, D., Lenard, M., Klimberg, R.K.: Incorporating quality into data envelopment analysis of nursing home performance: a case study. Omega 37, 672–685 (2009)PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

20.

Salinas-Jiménez, J., Smith, P.C.: Data envelopment analysis applied to quality in primary health care. Ann. Oper. Res. 67, 141–161 (1996)CrossRef

21.

García, F., Marcuello, C., Serrano, D., Urbina, O.: Evaluation of efficiency in primary healt care centres: An application of data envelopment analysis. Financial Account. Manag. 15(1), 67–83 (1999)CrossRef

22.

Wagner, J.M., Shimshak, D., Novak, M.: Advances in physician profiling: the use of DEA. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 37, 141–163 (2003)CrossRef

23.

Rosenman, R., Friesner, D.: Scope and scale efficiencies in physician practices. Health Econ. 13, 1091–1116 (2004)PubMedCrossRef

24.

Chilingerian, J., Sherman, H.: DEA and primary care physicians report cards: Deriving preferred practice cones from managed care service concepts and operating strategies. Ann. Oper. Res. 73, 35–66 (1997)CrossRef

25.

Shimshak, D.: Managing nursing home quality using DEA with weight restrictions. In: Lawrence, K.D., Kleinman, G. (eds.) Applications in Multicriteria Decision Making, Data Envelopment Analysis and Finance, Applications of Management Science, 14. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, UK (2010)

26.

Dyson, R.G., Thanassoulis, E.: Reducing weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 39(6), 563–576 (1988)

27.

Roll, Y., Cook, W.D., Golany, B.: Controlling factor weights in data envelopment analysis. IIE Trans. 23(1), 2–9 (1991)CrossRef

28.

Muñiz, M.: Separating managerial inefficiency and external conditions in data. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 143(3), 625–643 (2002)CrossRef

29.

Pestieau, P.: Assessing the performance of the public sector. Ann. Public Cooperative Econ. 80, 133–161 (2009)CrossRef

30.

Marathe, S., Wan, T., Zhang, J., Sherin, K.: Factors influencing community health centers’ efficiency: a latent growth curve modeling approach. J. Med. Syst. 31, 365–374 (2007)PubMedCrossRef

31.

Cordero, J.M., Pedraja, F., Salinas, J.: Measuring efficiency in education: An analysis of different approaches for incorporating non-discretionary inputs. Appl. Econ. 40(10), 1323–1339 (2008)CrossRef

32.

Hoff, A.: Second stage DEA: Comparison of approaches for modelling the DEA score. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 181, 425–435 (2007)CrossRef

33.

Ozcan, Y.A.: Physician benchmarking: measuring variation in practice behavior in treatment of otitis media. Health Care Manag. Sci. 1, 5–17 (1998)PubMedCrossRef

34.

Chen, A., Hwang, Y., Shao, B.: Measurement and sources of overall and input inefficiencies: evidences and implications in hospital services. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 161, 447–468 (2005)CrossRef

35.

Fried, H.O., Lovell, C.A.K., Van Den Eeckaut, P.: Evaluating the performance of US Credit unions. J. Bank. Finance 17, 251–265 (1993)CrossRef

36.

Tofallis, C.: Combining two approaches to efficiency assessment. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 52, 1225–1231 (2001)CrossRef

37.

Kontodimopoulos, N., Papathanasiou, N., Tountas, Y., Niakas, D.: Separating managerial inefficiency from influences of the operating environment: an application in dialysis. J. Med. Syst. 34(3), 397–405 (2010)PubMedCrossRef

38.

Simar, L., Wilson, P.W.: Estimation and inference in two-stage, semiparametric models of production processes. J. Econom. 136, 31–64 (2007)CrossRef

39.

Murillo-Zamorano, L.R., Vega, J., De Miguel, F., Morillo, J. and Sánchez, M.: APEX06. Sistema de Información de la Atención Primaria en la Comunidad Autónoma de Extremadura, 2006. In: Murillo and Vega. (eds.) Badajoz, Spain (2011)

40.

Johnson, A., McGinnis, L.F.: Outlier detection in two-stage semiparametric DEA models. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 187, 629–635 (2008)CrossRef

41.

Donabedian, A.: The Definition of Quality and Approaches to its Assessment, vol. 1. Health Administration Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan (1980)

42.

Dyson, R.G., Allen, R., Camanho, A.S., Podinovski, V.V., Sarrico, C.S., Shale, E.A.: Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 132, 245–259 (2001)CrossRef

43.

Thompson, A., Sunol, R.: Expectations as determinants for patient satisfaction: Concept, theory and evidence. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 7(2), 127–141 (1995)PubMedCrossRef

44.

Ruggiero, J.: Performance evaluation when non-discretionary factors correlate with technical efficiency. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 159, 250–257 (2004)CrossRef

45.

Campbell, S.M., Braspenning, J., Hutchinson, A., Marshall, M.: Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care. Qual. Saf. Health Care 11, 358–364 (2002)PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

46.

Adler, N., Yazhemsky, E.: Improving discrimination in data envelopment analysis: PCA-DEA or variable reduction. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 202, 273–284 (2010)CrossRef

47.

Jobson, J.D.: “Principal components factors and correspondence analysis”. In: Jobson, J.D. (ed.). Springer texts in statistics. Applied multivariate data analysis, Vol. II. Categorical and multivariate methods, pp. 345–482. Springer, New York, (1992)

48.

Abdy, H.: Multivariate Analysis. In: Lewis-Beck M., Bryman A., Futing T. (eds.) Encyclopedia for research methods for social sciences. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2003)

49.

Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W.: Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag. Sci. 30(9), 1078–1092 (1984)CrossRef

50.

Banker, R.D.: Hypotesis tests using data envelopment analysis. J. Prod. Anal. 7, 139–159 (1996)CrossRef

51.

Tone, K.: On returns to scale under weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis. J. Prod. Anal. 16, 31–47 (2001)CrossRef

52.

Coelli, T.: “A Guide to DEAP Version 2.1, A Data envelopment analysis (computer) program. CEPA Working Paper 96/08 (1996)

Titel: The effect of quality and socio-demographic variables on efficiency measures in primary health care
verfasst von: José Manuel Cordero Ferrera
Eva Crespo Cebada
Luis R. Murillo Zamorano
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2014
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: The European Journal of Health Economics / Ausgabe 3/2014
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Elektronische ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-013-0476-1

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

The effect of quality and socio-demographic variables on efficiency measures in primary health care

Abstract

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2014

Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgical procedures for the treatment of severe obesity

Eliciting preferences to the EQ-5D-5L health states: discrete choice experiment or multiprofile case of best–worst scaling?

Education, cognition, health knowledge, and health behavior

Health, social and economic consequences of hypersomnia: a controlled national study from a national registry evaluating the societal effect on patients and their partners

Blood donation as a public good: an empirical investigation of the free rider problem

Are biosimilars the next tool to guarantee cost-containment for pharmaceutical expenditures?