Competition and dental services.

Clicks: 148
ID: 34377
2000
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #14 of 16 articles by views in Health economics

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Dental services for adults are different from all other Norwegian health services in that they are provided by private producers (dentists) who have full freedom to establish a practice. They have had this freedom since the end of World War II. A further liberalization of the market for dental services occurred in November 1995, when the so-called normal tariff was repealed. The system changed from a fixed fee system to a deregulated fee system. In principle, the market for dental services for adults operates as a free competitive market, in which dentists must compete for a market share. The aim of this study was to study the short-term effects of competition. A comprehensive set of data on fees, practice characteristics, treatment profiles and factors that dentists take into account when determining fees was analysed. The main finding was that competition has a weak effect. No support was found for the theory that the level of fees is the result of monopolistic competition or monopoly. The results also provided some evidence against the inducement hypothesis. At this stage, it is interesting to notice that dentists do not seem to exploit the power they have to control the market. One explanation, which is consistent with the more recent literature, is that physicians' behaviour to a large extent is influenced by professional norms and caring concerns about their patients. Financial incentives are important, but these incentives are constrained by norms other than self-interest. The interpretation of the results should also take into account that the deregulation has operated for a short time and that dentists and patients may not yet have adjusted to changes in the characteristics of the market.
Reference Key
grytten2000competitionhealth Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Grytten, J;Sørensen, R;
Journal Health economics
Year 2000
DOI
DOI not found
URL URL not found
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.