Search

Policies aiming to spur quality competition among health care providers are ubiquitous, but their impact on quality is ex ante ambiguous, and credible empirical evidence is lacking in many contexts. This study contributes to the sparse literature on competition and primary care quality by examining recent competition enhancing reforms in Sweden. The reforms aimed to stimulate patient choice and entry of private providers across the country but affected markets differently depending on the initial market structure. We exploit the heterogeneous impact of the reforms in a difference-in-differences strategy, contrasting more and less exposed markets over the period 2005-2013. Although the reforms led to substantially more entry of new providers in more exposed markets, the effects on primary care quality were modest: We find small improvements of patients' overall satisfaction with care, but no consistently significant effects on avoidable hospitalisation rates or satisfaction with access to care. We find no evidence of economically meaningful quality reductions on any outcome measure.

Antibiotic resistance is a major threat to public health worldwide. As the healthcare sector's use of antibiotics is an important contributor to the development of resistance, it is crucial that physicians only prescribe antibiotics when needed and that they choose narrow-spectrum antibiotics, which act on fewer bacteria types, when possible. Inappropriate use of antibiotics is nonetheless widespread, not least for respiratory tract infections (RTI), a common reason for antibiotics prescriptions. We examine if pay-for-performance (P4P) presents a way to influence primary care physicians' choice of antibiotics. During 2006-2013, 8 Swedish healthcare authorities adopted P4P to make physicians select narrow-spectrum antibiotics more often in the treatment of children with RTI. Exploiting register data on all purchases of RTI antibiotics in a difference-in-differences analysis, we find that P4P significantly increased the share of narrow-spectrum antibiotics. There are no signs that physicians gamed the system by issuing more prescriptions overall.

Summary Antibiotic resistance is a major threat to public health worldwide. As the healthcare sector's use of antibiotics is an important contributor to the development of resistance, it is crucial that physicians only prescribe antibiotics when needed and that they choose narrow‐spectrum antibiotics, which act on fewer bacteria types, when possible. Inappropriate use of antibiotics is nonetheless widespread, not least for respiratory tract infections (RTI), a common reason for antibiotics prescriptions. We examine if pay‐for‐performance (P4P) presents a way to influence primary care physicians' choice of antibiotics. During 2006–2013, 8 Swedish healthcare authorities adopted P4P to make physicians select narrow‐spectrum antibiotics more often in the treatment of children with RTI. Exploiting register data on all purchases of RTI antibiotics in a difference‐in‐differences analysis, we find that P4P significantly increased the share of narrow‐spectrum antibiotics. There are no signs that physicians gamed the system by issuing more prescriptions overall.