scholarly journals Insurer-Provider Networks in the Medical Care Market

2009 ◽  
Vol 99 (1) ◽  
pp. 393-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Ho

I use data on the hospital networks offered by managed care health insurers to estimate the expected division of profits between insurers and providers. I include a simple profit-maximization framework and an additional effect: hospitals that can secure demand without contracting with all insurers (e.g., those most attractive to consumers and those that are capacity constrained) may demand high prices that some insurers refuse to pay. Hospital mergers may also affect price bargaining. I estimate that all three types of hospitals capture higher markups than other providers. These results provide information on the hospital investment incentives generated by bargaining. (JEL G22, G34, I11, L25)

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 90 (2) ◽  
pp. 278-279
Author(s):  
JENIFER D. C. CARTLAND ◽  
BETH K. YUDKOWSKY

In Reply.— Doctors Sapin and Laws raise fundamental concerns about our article that was recently published in Pediatrics.1 We feel that these concerns are addressed adequately in the paper, but we would like to take this opportunity to clarify our findings. Dr Sapin argues that our study characterizes all managed care plans, such as the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program in which he practices, as having ineffective referral mechanisms. He holds that pediatricians at Kaiser experience "no barriers to appropriate referrals" and indicates that we did not stress this finding adequately.


2019 ◽  
Vol 109 (2) ◽  
pp. 473-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Ho ◽  
Robin S. Lee

We evaluate the consequences of narrow hospital networks in commercial health care markets. We develop a bargaining solution, “Nash-in-Nash with Threat of Replacement,” that captures insurers’ incentives to exclude, and combine it with California data and estimates from Ho and Lee (2017) to simulate equilibrium outcomes under social, consumer, and insurer-optimal networks. Private incentives to exclude generally exceed social incentives, as the insurer benefits from substantially lower negotiated hospital rates. Regulation prohibiting exclusion increases prices and premiums and lowers consumer welfare without significantly affecting social surplus. However, regulation may prevent harm to consumers living close to excluded hospitals. (JEL C78, D85, G22, H75, I11, I13, I18)


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 178-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin L. Winthrop ◽  
Theodore K. Marras ◽  
Jennifer Adjemian ◽  
Haixin Zhang ◽  
Ping Wang ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document