Medical Errors: Getting the Incentives Right
Author(s) -
Sverre Grepperud
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
international journal of health care finance and economics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1573-6962
pISSN - 1389-6563
DOI - 10.1007/s10754-005-3984-4
Subject(s) - incentive , punitive damages , anonymity , confidentiality , accountability , scope (computer science) , scheme (mathematics) , business , work (physics) , computer security , scale (ratio) , yield (engineering) , internet privacy , law and economics , risk analysis (engineering) , computer science , microeconomics , economics , law , engineering , political science , mathematical analysis , programming language , physics , materials science , mathematics , quantum mechanics , metallurgy , mechanical engineering
This work examines the role of penalties as providers of incentives to prevent medical errors and ensure that such incidents, once they occur, become common knowledge. It is shown that a scheme with two penalties (accountability and non-report) induces the first-best solution. However, this scheme does not necessarily imply a punitive environment, but may, under given circumstances, yield insignificant and even negative penalties. Alternative sanction systems, such as voluntary reporting and immunity, are found to have less desirable properties. An exception is confidentiality (anonymity) which turns out to be an optimal scheme. Finally, the examination of various penalty restrictions (scope and scale) shows that such barriers may promote both tougher and softer sanction schemes.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom