The sorting effect in healthcare access: Those left behind.

Many governments have sought to enhance patient choice in hospital by intensifying competitive pressure on hospital administrations that is expected to improve efficiency, quality, and innovation. However, there is mixed evidence on whether patients travel past their local hospitals to seek better quality care and whether higher-income patients are those most sensitive to respond to competitive pressures. Using detailed data from 17 million inpatient stays admitted in France during 2019, this paper explores patients' choice of provider where for-profit, non-profit, research hospital and local hospitals are allowed to compete with each other. We estimate the extent to which deprivation gradient plays on patient's choice of provider. We found that, in general, patients travel for their care, with just one-quarter of them going to the nearest hospital. In fact, the most vulnerable patients (i.e., those socio-economically deprived, and very aged) are mostly treated in local public hospitals with the lowest quality service level, and with large variability in quality as well, while those with less socio-economic deprivation seek care at higher-quality for-profit hospitals. Our counterfactual simulations show that admission to university hospitals attenuates existing inequalities. However, whether it delays the healthcare access sought by this population remains an open question. • Patients do not go to the closest hospital (26%); they go to the nearest hospital for given ownership (82%). • Healthcare quality and distance are typical factors, but social networks also affect the patient choice of hospital ownership. • Counterfactual simulations show treating in university hospitals is not sensitive to patient socio-economic deprivation. • Increasing the distance or reducing quality drives patients to be treated in university hospitals; in some ways, existing inequalities are attenuated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]