Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Which preferred providers are really preferred? Effectiveness of insurers’ channeling incentives on pharmacy choice

  • Published:
International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Efficient contracting of health care requires effective consumer channeling. Little is known about the effectiveness of channeling strategies. We study channeling incentives on pharmacy choice using a large scale discrete choice experiment. Financial incentives prove to be effective. Positive financial incentives are less effective than negative financial incentives. Channeling through qualitative incentives also leads to a significant impact on provider choice. While incentives help to channel, a strong status quo bias needs to be overcome before consumers change pharmacies. Focusing on consumers who are forced to choose a new pharmacy seems to be the most effective strategy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bech M., Gyrd-Hansen D. (2005) Effects coding in discrete choice experiments. Health Economics 14(10): 1079–1083. doi:10.1002/hec.984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boonen L.H.H.M., Schut F.T. (2007) Effect van prikkels op keuze voor zorgaanbieders. Economisch-Statistische Berichten 92(4521): 651–653

    Google Scholar 

  • Boonen L.H.H.M., Schut F.T., Koolman X. (2008) Consumer channeling by health insurers: natural experiments with preferred providers in the Dutch pharmacy market. Health Economics 17(3): 299–316. doi:10.1002/hec.1265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu-Weininger, M. Y. L., & Balkrishnan, R. (2006). Consumer satisfaction with primary care provider choice and associated trust. BMC Health Services Research, 6, 139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enthoven A.C., van de Ven W.P.M.M. (2007) Going Dutch - managed competition health insurance in the Netherlands. The New England Journal of Medicine 357(24): 2421–2423. doi:10.1056/NEJMp078199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman R., Finch M., Dowd B., Cassou S. (1989) The demand for employment-based health insurance plans. The Journal of Human Resources 24(1): 115–142. doi:10.2307/145935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garnick D.W., Lichtenberg E., Phibbs C.S., Luft H.S., Peltzman D.J., McPhee S.J. (1989) The sensitivity of conditional choice models for hospital care to estimation technique. Journal of Health Economics 8(4): 377–397. doi:10.1016/0167-6296(90)90022-U

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gawande A.A., Blendon R., Brodie M., Benson J.M., Levitt L., Hugick L. (1998) Does dissatisfaction with health plans stem from having no choices?. Health Affairs (Project Hope) 17(5): 184–194. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.17.5.184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann W. (1983) Marginal welfare measures for discrete choice models. Economics Letters 13: 129–136. doi:10.1016/0165-1765(83)90074-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hole A.R. (2007) A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures. Health Economics 16(8): 827–840. doi:10.1002/hec.1197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hole A.R. (2008) Modeling heterogeneity in patients’ preferences for the attributes of a general practitioner appointment. Journal of Health Economics 27(4): 1078–1094. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2007.11.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber J., Zwerina K. (1996) The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research 33(3): 107. doi:10.2307/3152127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, P. J. (1967). The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under non-standard conditions. In Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1: 221–233.

  • Kahneman D., Knetsch J.L., Thaler R.H. (1991) The endowment effect, loss aversion and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(1): 193–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim B.R. (1990) A logit analysis of hospital choice behavior in Chollabukdo Province of Korea. Social Science & Medicine 30(10): 1119–1129. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(90)90298-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King M.T., Hall J., Lancsar E., Fiebig D., Hossain I., Louviere J. et al (2007) Patient preferences for managing asthma: Results from a discrete choice experiment. Health Economics 16(7): 703–717. doi:10.1002/hec.1193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjaer T., Bech M., Gyrd-Hansen D., Hart-Hansen K. (2006) Ordering effect and price sensitivity in discrete choice experiments: Need we worry?. Health Economics 15(11): 1217–1228. doi:10.1002/hec.1117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster K. (1966) A new approach to consumer theory. The Journal of Political Economy 74(2): 132–157. doi:10.1086/259131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster K. (1971) Consumer demand a new approach. Columbia University Press, Columbia

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancsar, E. (2002). Deriving welfare measures from stated preference discrete choice modelling experiments (pp. 1–53). Sydney: Centre for Health economics research and evaluation, University of Technology Sydney.

  • Longo M.F., Cohen D.R., Hood K., Edwards A., Robling M., Elwyn G. et al (2006) Involving patients in primary care consultations: Assessing preferences using discrete choice experiments. The British Journal of General Practice 56(522): 35–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Manski C.F. (1977) The structure of random utility models. Theory and Decision, 8: 229–254. doi:10.1007/BF00133443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadden D. (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka P. (eds) Frontiers in econometrics. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh E., Ryan M. (2002) Using discrete choice experiments to derive welfare estimates for the provision of elective surgery: Implications of discontinuous preferences. Journal of Economic Psychology 23(3): 367–382. doi:10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00081-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melnick G.A., Zwanziger J., Bamezai A., Pattison R. (1992) The effects of market structure and bargaining position on hospital prices. Journal of Health Economics 11(3): 217–233. doi:10.1016/0167-6296(92)90001-H

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller N.H. (2006) Insurer-provider integration, credible commitment, and managed-care backlash. Journal of Health Economics 25(5): 861–876. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2005.12.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neipp J., Zeckhauser R. (1985) Persistence in the choice of health plans. Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research 6: 47–72

    Google Scholar 

  • NZa. (2007). Visiedocument Richting geven aan keuzes. Kunnen verzekeraars consumenten stimuleren naar gecontracteerde voorkeursaanbieders te gaan? De Nederlandse Zorgautoriteit: Utrecht.

  • Pauly M.V. (1987) Monopsony power in health insurance: Thinking straight while standing on your head. Journal of Health Economics 6(1): 73–81. doi:10.1016/0167-6296(87)90032-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips K.A., Maddala T., Johnson F.R. (2002) Measuring preferences for health care interventions using conjoint analysis: An application to HIV testing. Health Services Research 37(6): 1681–1705. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.01115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin G., Bate A., George A., Shackley P., Hall N. (2006) Preferences for access to the GP: A discrete choice experiment. The British Journal of General Practice 56: 743–748

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M., Netten A., Skatun D., Smith P. (2006) Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome—an application to social care for older people. Journal of Health Economics 25(5): 927–944. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson W., Zeckhauser R. (1988) Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1: 7–59. doi:10.1007/BF00055564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schut F.T., Brouwer W.B.F. (2004) Preferente Apotheker?. Jazeker! Economisch-Statistische Berichten 89(4435): 266–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott A., Watson M.S., Ross S. (2003) Eliciting preferences of the community for out of hours care provided by general practitioners: A stated preference discrete choice experiment Social Science & Medicine, 56(4): 803–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen A.T. (2003) Insurer-hospital bargaining: Negotiated discounts in post-deregulation Connecticut. The Journal of Industrial Economics 51(4): 469–490. doi:10.1111/j.0022-1821.2003.00211.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stata Press. 1999. Stata User’s Guide Release 6 (pp. 256–260). Texas: Stata Press.

  • Staten M., Dunkelberg W., Umbeck J. (1987) Market share and the illusion of power. Can Blue Cross force hospitals to discount?. Journal of Health Economics 6(1): 43–58. doi:10.1016/0167-6296(87)90030-0

    Google Scholar 

  • Strombom B.A., Buchmueller T.C., Feldstein P.J. (2002) Switching costs, price sensitivity and health plan choice. Journal of Health Economics 21(1): 89–116. doi:10.1016/S0167-6296(01)00124-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tai W.T., Porell F.W., Adams E.K. (2004) Hospital choice of rural Medicare beneficiaries: Patient, hospital attributes, and the patient-physician relationship. Health Services Research 39(6): 1903–1922. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00324.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A., Kahneman D. (1991) Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. the Quarterly Journal of Economics 106(4): 1039–1061

    Google Scholar 

  • Vick S., Scott A. (1998) Agency in health care. Examining patients’ preferences for attributes of the doctor-patient relationship. Journal of Health Economics 17(5): 587–605. doi:10.1016/S0167-6296(97)00035-0

    Google Scholar 

  • White H. (1980) A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 28: 817–830. doi:10.2307/1912934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White H. (1982) Maximum likelihood estimation of misspecified models. Econometrica 50: 1–25. doi:10.2307/1912526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf de P., Brouwer W.B.F., Rutten F.H. (2005) Regulating the Dutch pharmaceutical market: Improving efficiency or controlling costs?. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 20(4): 351–374. doi:10.1002/hpm.819

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Medical Center, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Lieke H. H. M. Boonen, Frederik T. Schut & Xander Koolman

  2. Marketing Department, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Bas Donkers

  3. IPSE Studies, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, P.O. Box 5015, Delft, 2600 GA, The Netherlands

    Xander Koolman

Authors
  1. Lieke H. H. M. Boonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Frederik T. Schut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bas Donkers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xander Koolman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lieke H. H. M. Boonen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boonen, L.H.H.M., Schut, F.T., Donkers, B. et al. Which preferred providers are really preferred? Effectiveness of insurers’ channeling incentives on pharmacy choice. Int J Health Care Finance Econ 9, 347–366 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10754-009-9055-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10754-009-9055-5

Keywords

JEL Code

Search

Navigation