Abstract
We analyze the operational performance of 202 Turkish rural general hospitals. To help improve performance on both input and output space, we adopt a directional distance approach. We treat a mortality based measure as a “needs indicator”. We derive pure technical, scale and output congestion inefficiency measures and show how they vary across size classes. We show that “reducing mortality” involves sacrificing some good outputs. This is a trade off that holds at the potential output level. Second stage regressions of the inefficiency scores against hospital and rural district level variables, pinpoint critical areas for performance improvement. In particular we show the relative scarcity of nurses is linked to output congestion.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arocena, P., & Prado, A. G. (2007). Accounting for quality in the measurement of hospital performance: evidence from Costa Rica. Health Economics, 16, 667–685.
Buyukkayikci, H., & Sahin, I. (2000). The comparative analysis of patients’ costs with reimbursement in surgical services. Hacettepe Saglik Idaresi Dergisi, 5(3), 119–138 (in Turkish).
Chung, Y., Fare, R., & Grosskopf, S. (1997). Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 51, 229–240.
Dismuke, C. E., & Sena, V. (2001). Is there a trade-off between quality and productivity? The case of diagnostic technologies in Portugal. Annals of Operation Research, 107, 101–116.
Ersoy, K., Kavuncubasi, S., Ozcan, Y., & Harris, J. (1997). Technical efficiencies of Turkish Hospitals: DEA approach. Journal of Medical Systems, 21(2), 67–74.
Fare, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2004). New directions: efficiency and productivity. New York: Springer.
Fried, H. O., Lovell, C. A. K., & Turner, J. A. (1996). An analysis of the performance of university-affiliated credit unions. Computers & Operations Research, 23(4), 375–384.
Hollingsworth, B. (2008). The measurement of efficiency and productivity of health care delivery. Health Economics, 17, 1107–1128.
Hollingsworth, B., & Spinks, J. (2009). Cross-country comparisons of technical efficiency of health production: a demonstration of pitfalls. Applied Economics, 41, 417–427.
Hua, Z., & Bian, Y. (2007). DEA with undesirable factors. In W. Cook, & J. Zhu (Eds.), Data irregularities and structural complexities in DEA. New York: Springer.
Jacobs, R., Smith, P. C., & Street, A. (2006). Measuring efficiency in health care. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kuosmanen, T. (2002). Modeling blank entries in data envelopment analysis. (EconWPA working paper at WUSTL, no. 0210001).
Liu, W. B., Meng, W., Li, X. X., & Zhang, D. Q. (2010). DEA models with undesirable inputs and outputs. Annals of Operation Research, 173, 177–194.
Mo, H. (2003). Ministry of Health. Transformation in health. http://www.saglik.gov.tr/TR/Genel/BelgeGoster.aspx?=donusum%20programi.
Mo, H. (2006). Ministry of Health, health statistics 2006. Ankara: Office of Strategy Development. Ministry of Health.
Mo, H. (2009). Ministry of Health. Progress report on health transformation program in Turkey. http://sbu.saglik.gov.tr/Ekutuphane/kitaplar/TurkeySPDEng.pdf.
Nunamaker, T. R., & Lewin, A. Y. (1983). Measuring routine nursing efficiency: a comparison of cost per patient day and data envelopment analysis models/comment. Health Services Research, 18(2), 183–208.
OECD (2008). OECD review of health systems: TURKEY. Paris: OECD/World Bank.
OECD (2009). OECD Health Data 2009. http://www.oecd.org/health/healthdata.
O’Neill, L., Rauner, M., Heidelberger, K., & Kraus, M. (2008). A cross national comparison and taxonomy of DEA based hospital efficiency studies. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 42, 158–189.
Ozcan, Y. (2008). Health care benchmarking and performance evaluation: an assessment using data envelopment analysis. New York: Springer.
Pastor, J. T. (1996). Translation invariance in data envelopment analysis: A generalization. Annals of Operation Research, 66, 93–102.
Picazo-Tadeo, A. J., & Prior, D. (2005). Efficiency and environmental regulation: a ‘complex’ situation (WP 2005/2). Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona.
Ray, S. (2004). Data envelopment analysis: theory and techniques for economics and operations research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sahin, I. (2009). Total factor productivity analysis of Turkish Social Security hospitals that were transferred to the Health Ministry”. Iktisat Isletme ve Finans, 24, 9–40 (in Turkish).
Sahin, I., & Ozcan, Y. (2000). Public sector hospital efficiency for provincial markets in Turkey. Journal of Medical Systems, 24(6), 307–320.
Sahin, I., Ozcan, Y., & Ozgen, H. (2011). Assessment of hospital efficiency under health transformation program in Turkey. Central European Journal of Operations Research, 19, 19–37.
Scheel, H. (2001). Undesirable outputs in efficiency evaluations. European Journal of Operational Research, 132(2), 400–410.
Seiford, L., & Zhu, J. (2002). Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research, 142, 16–20.
Sherman, H. D. (1984). Hospital efficiency measurement and evaluation: empirical test of a new technique. Medical Care, 22(10), 922–938.
SPO (2004). Ilcelerin sosyoekonomik gelismislik siralamasi arastirmasi. Ankara: DPT.
Tas, H. I., & Lightfoot, D. R. (2005). Gecekondu settlements in Turkey: rural-urban migration in the developing European periphery. Journal of Geography, 106(4), 263–271.
Thanassoulis, E., Portela, M. C. S., & Despic, O. (2008). DEA: the mathematical programming approach to efficiency analysis. In H. Fried, C. A. Knox Lovell, & S. S. Schmidt (Eds.), The measurement of productive efficiency and productivity growth. New York: Oxford University Press.
World Bank (2003). Turkey: reforming the health sector for improved access and efficiency. IBRD (Vols. 1 and 2). Washington DC.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
N. Davutyan is ERF Fellow.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bilsel, M., Davutyan, N. Hospital efficiency with risk adjusted mortality as undesirable output: the Turkish case. Ann Oper Res 221, 73–88 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-011-0951-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-011-0951-y