Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Medical Systems
Published in: Journal of Medical Systems 5/2011

01-10-2011 | Original Paper

The Impact of Non-Discretionary Factors on DEA and SFA Technical Efficiency Differences

Authors: Nick Kontodimopoulos, Nikolaos D. Papathanasiou, Angeliki Flokou, Yannis Tountas, Dimitris Niakas

Published in: Journal of Medical Systems | Issue 5/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine if factors of the external operating environment can explain differences in technical efficiency derived from Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA). In a sample of 124 dialysis facilities, technical efficiency was compared according to ownership, region, years in operation and size. With second-stage Tobit regression, DEA and SFA efficiency was regressed against these environmental factors to determine their potential for predicting technical efficiency, as well as the efficiency differences between the two frontier methods. DEA expectedly generated lower mean efficiency scores than SFA (68.2% vs. 79.4%, P < 0.001), due to the “random effects” term computed by the latter, in addition to “true” inefficiency. This finding was consistent for the subgroups formed on the basis of the environmental factors. Half the variation in the DEA-SFA efficiency differences was explained by environmental factors. This suggests that in addition to market instabilities, luck, and other related phenomena, decision-makers in their effort to determine optimal resource allocation, should point their attention to the potentially useful insight provided by environmental factors.
Literature
1.
Fried, H. O., Schmidt, S. S., and Yaisawarng, S., Incorporating the operating environment into a nonparametric measure of technical efficiency. J. Prod. Anal. 12:249–267, 1999.CrossRef
2.
Lovell, C. A. K., Production frontiers and productive efficiency. In: Fried, H. O., Lovell, C. A. K., and Schmidt, S. S. (Eds.), The measurement of productive efficiency: techniques and applications. Oxford University Press, New York, 1993.
3.
Hollingsworth, B., Non-parametric and parametric applications measuring efficiency in health care. Health Care Manag. Sci. 6:203–218, 2003.CrossRef
4.
Worthington, A. C., Frontier efficiency measurement in health care: a review of empirical techniques and selected applications. Med. Care. Res. Rev. 61:135–170, 2004.CrossRef
5.
Hollingsworth, B., Dawson, P., and Maniadakis, N., Efficiency measurement of health care: a review of non-parametric methods and applications. Health Care Manag. Sci. 2:161–172, 1999.CrossRef
6.
Emrouznejad, A., Parker, B. R., and Tavares, G., Evaluation of research in efficiency and productivity: a survey and analysis of the first 30 years of scholarly literature in DEA. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 42:151–157, 2008.CrossRef
7.
Ruggiero, J., Performance evaluation when non-discretionary factors correlate with technical efficiency. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 159:250–257, 2004.MATHCrossRef
8.
Fried, H. O., Lovell, C. A. K., Schmidt, S. S., and Yaisawarng, S., Accounting for environmental effects and statistical noise in data envelopment analysis. J. Prod. Anal. 17:157–174, 2002.CrossRef
9.
Hoff, A., Second stage DEA: comparison of approaches for modeling the DEA score. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 181:425–435, 2007.MATHCrossRef
10.
Wooldridge, J. M., Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2002.MATH
11.
Rosko, M. D., Impact of internal and external environmental pressures on hospital inefficiency. Health Care Manag. Sci. 2:63–74, 1999.CrossRef
12.
Chu, H. L., Liu, S. Z., and Romeis, J. C., Does the implementation of responsibility centers, total quality management, and physician fee programs improve hospital efficiency? Evidence from Taiwan hospitals. Med. Care 40:1223–1237, 2002.CrossRef
13.
Pilyavsky, A. I., Aaronson, W. E., Bernet, P. M., Rosko, M. D., Valdmanis, V. G., and Golubchikov, M. V., East-west: does it make a difference to hospital efficiencies in Ukraine? Health Econ. 15:1173–1186, 2006.CrossRef
14.
Kooreman, P., Nursing home care in The Netherlands: a nonparametric efficiency analysis. J. Health Econ. 13:301–316, 1994.CrossRef
15.
Rosko, M. D., Chilingerian, J. A., Zinn, J. S., and Aaronson, W. E., The effects of ownership, operating environment, and strategic choices on nursing home efficiency. Med. Care 33:1001–1021, 1995.CrossRef
16.
Zavras, A. I., Tsakos, G., Economou, C., and Kyriopoulos, J., Using DEA to evaluate efficiency and formulate policy within a Greek national primary health care network. Data Envelopment Analysis. J. Med. Syst. 26:285–292, 2002.CrossRef
17.
Kontodimopoulos, N., Moschovakis, G., Aletras, V., and Niakas, D., The relationship between eligible service population and efficiency in primary health care providers in Greece. Cost Eff. Resour. Alloc. 5:14, 2007.CrossRef
18.
Linna, M., Nordblad, A., and Koivu, M., Technical and cost efficiency of oral health care provision in Finnish health centres. Soc. Sci. Med. 56:343–353, 2003.CrossRef
19.
Chilingerian, J. A., Evaluating physician efficiency in hospitals: a multivariate analysis of best practices. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 80:548–574, 1995.MATHCrossRef
20.
Ozgen, H., and Ozcan, Y., A national study of efficiency for dialysis centers: an examination of market competition and facility characteristics for production of multiple dialysis outputs. Health Serv. Res. 37:711–732, 2002.CrossRef
21.
Gerard, K., and Roderick, P., Comparison of apparent efficiency of haemodialysis satellite units in England and Wales using data envelopment analysis. Int. J. Tech. Assess. Health Care 19:533–539, 2003.CrossRef
22.
Kontodimopoulos, N., and Niakas, D., Efficiency measurement of hemodialysis units in Greece with data envelopment analysis. Health Policy 71:195–204, 2005.CrossRef
23.
Ozgen, H., and Ozcan, Y., Longitudinal analysis of efficiency in multiple output dialysis markets. Health Care Manag. Sci. 7:253–261, 2004.CrossRef
24.
Kontodimopoulos, N., and Niakas, D., A 12-year analysis of Malmquist total factor productivity in dialysis facilities. J. Med. Sys. 30:333–342, 2006.CrossRef
25.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., and Rhodes, E., Measuring efficiency of decision-making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 3:429–444, 1978.MathSciNetCrossRef
26.
Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., and Cooper, W. W., Models for estimating technical and scale efficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag. Sci. 30:1078–1092, 1984.MATHCrossRef
27.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L., and Stutz, J., A multiplicative model for efficiency analysis. Socio-Economic Planning Sci. 6:223–224, 1982.CrossRef
28.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Golany, B., and Seiford, L., Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions. J. Econometrics 30:91–107, 1985.MATHMathSciNetCrossRef
29.
Charnes, A., Haag, S., Jaska, P., and Semple, J., Sensitivity of efficiency classifications in the additive model of data envelopment analysis. Int. J. Sys. Sci. 23:789–798, 1992.MATHMathSciNetCrossRef
30.
Aigner, D. J., Lovell, C. A. K., and Schmidt, P., Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. J. Econometrics 6:21–37, 1977.MATHMathSciNetCrossRef
31.
Meeusen, W., and van den Broeck, J., Efficiency estimation from Cobb-Douglas production functions with composed error. Int. Econ. Rev. 18:435–444, 1977.MATHCrossRef
32.
Kumbhakar, S. C., and Lovell, C. A. K., The estimation of technical efficiency. In: Stochastic frontier analysis (pp. 63–130). Cambridge University Press, 2000.
33.
Jondrow, J., Lovell, C. A. K., Materov, S., and Schmidt, P., On the estimation of technical efficiency in the stochastic frontier production function model. J. Econometrics 19:233–238, 1982.MathSciNetCrossRef
34.
Smith, P., Model misspecification in data envelopment analysis. Ann. Oper. Res. 73:233–252, 1997.MATHCrossRef
35.
Held, P. J., and Pauly, M. V., Competition and efficiency in the end stage renal disease program. J. Health Econ. 2:95–118, 1983.CrossRef
36.
Coelli, T., Rao, D. S., and Battese, G., An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. Kluwer, Boston, 1998.MATHCrossRef
37.
Aletras, V., Kontodimopoulos, N., Zagouldoudis, A., and Niakas, D., The short-term effect on technical and scale efficiency of establishing Regional Health Systems and General Management in Greek NHS hospitals. Health Policy 83:236–245, 2007.CrossRef
38.
McCallion, G., Glass, J. C., Jackson, R., Kerr, C. A., and McKillop, D. G., Investigating productivity change and hospital size: a nonparametric frontier approach. Appl. Econ. 32:161–174, 2000.CrossRef
39.
Kazley, A. S., and Ozcan, Y. A., Electronic medical record use and efficiency: a DEA and windows analysis of hospitals. Socio-Economic Planning Sci. 43:209–216, 2009.CrossRef
40.
Sheldon, T. A., and Smith, P. C., Equity in the allocation of health care resources. Health Econ. 9:571–574, 2000.CrossRef
41.
Reinhard, S., Lovell, C. A. K., and Thijssen, G. J., Environmental efficiency with multiple environmentally detrimental variables; estimated with SFA and DEA. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 121:287–303, 2000.MATHCrossRef
42.
Margari, B. B., Erbetta, F., and Petraglia, C., Regulatory and environmental effects on public transit efficiency: a mixed DEA-SFA approach. J. Reg. Econ. 32:131–151, 2007.CrossRef
43.
Jacobs, R., Alternative methods to examine hospital efficiency: data envelopment analysis and stochastic frontier analysis. Health Care Manag. Sci. 4:103–115, 2001.CrossRef
44.
Kontodimopoulos, N., Papathanasiou, N.D., Tountas, Y., and Niakas, D., Isolating managerial inefficiency from external influences across dialysis facilities. Online Early in J Medical Sys. doi:10.​1007/​s10916-009-9252-2.
45.
Kooreman, P., Data envelopment analysis and parametric frontier estimation: Complementary tools. J. Health Econ. 13:345–346, 1994.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The Impact of Non-Discretionary Factors on DEA and SFA Technical Efficiency Differences
Authors
Nick Kontodimopoulos
Nikolaos D. Papathanasiou
Angeliki Flokou
Yannis Tountas
Dimitris Niakas
Publication date
01-10-2011
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Medical Systems / Issue 5/2011
Print ISSN: 0148-5598
Electronic ISSN: 1573-689X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-010-9521-0

Other articles of this Issue 5/2011

Journal of Medical Systems 5/2011 Go to the issue

ORIGINAL PAPER

An Efficient Automated Algorithm to Detect Ocular Surface Temperature on Sequence of Thermograms Using Snake and Target Tracing Function

Original Paper

Designing a Personal Health Application for Older Adults to Manage Medications: A Comprehensive Case Study

Original Paper

A Multiple Stage Approach for Performance Improvement of Primary Healthcare Practice

Editorial

Topic of Special Issue: Distributed Diagnosis and Home Healthcare

Original Paper

Morphological Multiscale Enhancement, Fuzzy Filter and Watershed for Vascular Tree Extraction in Angiogram

Original Paper

Inter-Greedy Technique for Fusion of Different Segmentation Strategies Leading to High-Performance Carotid IMT Measurement in Ultrasound Images