A national study of efficiency for dialysis centers: an examination of market competition and facility characteristics for production of multiple dialysis outputs
- PMID: 12132602
- PMCID: PMC1434658
- DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.00045
A national study of efficiency for dialysis centers: an examination of market competition and facility characteristics for production of multiple dialysis outputs
Abstract
Objective: To examine market competition and facility characteristics that can be related to technical efficiency in the production of multiple dialysis outputs from the perspective of the industrial organization model.
Study setting: Freestanding dialysis facilities that operated in 1997 submitted cost report fonns to the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), and offered all three outputs--outpatient dialysis, dialysis training, and home program dialysis.
Data sources: The Independent Renal Facility Cost Report Data file (IRFCRD) from HCFA was utilized to obtain information on output and input variables and market and facility features for 791 multiple-output facilities. Information regarding population characteristics was obtained from the Area Resources File.
Study design: Cross-sectional data for the year 1997 were utilized to obtain facility-specific technical efficiency scores estimated through Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). A binary variable of efficiency status was then regressed against its market and facility characteristics and control factors in a multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Principal findings: The majority of the facilities in the sample are functioning technically inefficiently. Neither the intensity of market competition nor a policy of dialyzer reuse has a significant effect on the facilities' efficiency. Technical efficiency is significantly associated, however, with type of ownership, with the interaction between the market concentration of for-profits and ownership type, and with affiliations with chains of different sizes. Nonprofit and government-owned Facilities are more likely than their for-profit counterparts to become inefficient producers of renal dialysis outputs. On the other hand, that relationship between ownership form and efficiency is reversed as the market concentration of for-profits in a given market increases. Facilities that are members of large chains are more likely to be technically inefficient.
Conclusions: Facilities do not appear to benefit from joint production of a variety of dialysis outputs, which may explain the ongoing tendency toward single-output production. Ownership form does make a positive difference in production efficiency, but only in local markets where competition exists between nonprofit and for-profit facilities. The increasing inefficiency associated with membership in large chains suggests that the growing consolidation in the dialysis industry may not, in fact, be the strategy for attaining more technical efficiency in the production of multiple dialysis outputs.
Similar articles
-
The production of dialysis by for-profit versus not-for-profit freestanding renal dialysis facilities.Health Serv Res. 1994 Oct;29(4):473-87. Health Serv Res. 1994. PMID: 7928373 Free PMC article.
-
Efficiency of U.S. dialysis centers: an updated examination of facility characteristics that influence production of dialysis treatments.Health Serv Res. 2014 Jun;49(3):838-57. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12127. Epub 2013 Nov 18. Health Serv Res. 2014. PMID: 24237043 Free PMC article.
-
Consolidation in the Dialysis Industry, Patient Choice, and Local Market Competition.Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 Mar 7;12(3):536-545. doi: 10.2215/CJN.06340616. Epub 2016 Nov 9. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017. PMID: 27831510 Free PMC article.
-
Nonprofit conversion: theory, evidence, and state policy options.Health Serv Res. 1998 Dec;33(5 Pt 2):1495-535. Health Serv Res. 1998. PMID: 9865231 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of mortality between private for-profit and private not-for-profit hemodialysis centers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JAMA. 2002 Nov 20;288(19):2449-57. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.19.2449. JAMA. 2002. PMID: 12435258 Review.
Cited by
-
For-profit status and industry evolution in health care markets: evidence from the dialysis industry.Int J Health Econ Manag. 2016 Dec;16(4):297-319. doi: 10.1007/s10754-016-9192-6. Epub 2016 Jul 14. Int J Health Econ Manag. 2016. PMID: 27878689
-
The impact of non-discretionary factors on DEA and SFA technical efficiency differences.J Med Syst. 2011 Oct;35(5):981-9. doi: 10.1007/s10916-010-9521-0. Epub 2010 May 7. J Med Syst. 2011. PMID: 20703676
-
The effect of dialysis chains on mortality among patients receiving hemodialysis.Health Serv Res. 2011 Jun;46(3):747-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2010.01219.x. Epub 2010 Dec 9. Health Serv Res. 2011. PMID: 21143480 Free PMC article.
-
Voluntary medical male circumcision scale-up in Nyanza, Kenya: evaluating technical efficiency and productivity of service delivery.PLoS One. 2015 Feb 23;10(2):e0118152. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118152. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 25706119 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of dialysis center profit-status on patient survival: a comparison of risk-adjustment and instrumental variable approaches.Health Serv Res. 2006 Dec;41(6):2267-89. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00581.x. Health Serv Res. 2006. PMID: 17116120 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW. “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis.”. Management Science. 1984;30(9):1078–92.
-
- Bovbjerg RR, Held PJ, Diamond LH. “Provider-Patient Relations and Treatment Choice in the Era of Fiscal Incentives: The Case of the End-Stage Renal Disease Program.”. Milbank Quarterly. 1987;65(2):177–202. - PubMed
-
- Burns J. “Dialysis Providers Cope with Dwindling Reimbursement.”. Modern Healthcare. 1992:56–7. - PubMed
-
- Charnes A, Cooper WW, Lewin AY, Seiford LM. Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology, and Applications. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1994.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical