The Effect of Certificate of Need Laws on All-Cause Mortality.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To test how Certificate of Need laws affect all-cause mortality in the United States.Data sources
The data of 1992-2011 all-cause mortality are from the Center for Disease Control's Compressed Mortality File; control variables are from the Current Population Survey, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and Area Health Resources File; and data on Certificate of Need laws are from Stratmann and Russ ().Study design
Using fixed- and random-effects regressions, I test how the scope of state Certificate of Need laws affects all-cause mortality within US counties.Principal findings
Certificate of Need laws have no statistically significant effect on all-cause mortality. Point estimates indicate that if they have any effect, they are more likely to increase mortality than decrease it.Conclusions
Proponents of Certificate of Need laws have claimed that they reduce mortality by concentrating more care into fewer, larger facilities that engage in learning-by-doing. However, I find no evidence that these laws reduce all-cause mortality.
SUBMITTER: Bailey J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5785317 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The Effect of Certificate of Need Laws on All-Cause Mortality.
Health services research 20161201 1
<h4>Objective</h4>To test how Certificate of Need laws affect all-cause mortality in the United States.<h4>Data sources</h4>The data of 1992-2011 all-cause mortality are from the Center for Disease Control's Compressed Mortality File; control variables are from the Current Population Survey, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and Area Health Resources File; and data on Certificate of Need laws are from Stratmann and Russ ().<h4>Study design</h4>Using fixed- and random-effects regression ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCertificate-of-need (CON) laws in place in most US states require healthcare providers to prove to a state board that their proposed services are necessary in order to be allowed to open or expand. While CON laws most commonly target hospital and nursing home beds, many states require CONs for other types of healthcare providers and services. As of 2020, 23 states retain CON laws specifically for substance use treatment, requiring providers to prove their "economic necessity" before opening or expanding. In contrast to the extensive academic literature on how hospital and nursing home CON laws affect costs and access, substance use CON laws are essentially unstudied.MethodsUsing 2002-19 data on substance use treatment facilities from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services, we measure the effect of CON laws on access to substance use treatment. Using fixed-effects analysis of states enacting and repealing substance use CON laws, we measure how CON laws affect the number of substance use treament facilities and beds per capita in a state.ResultsWe find that CON laws have no statistically significant effect on the number of facilities, beds, or clients and no significant effect on the acceptance of Medicare. However, they reduce the acceptance of private insurance by a statistically significant 6.0%.ConclusionsPolicy makers may wish to reconsider whether substance use CON laws are promoting their goals.
| S-EPMC9118675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCertificate of Need (CON) laws, currently in place in 35 US states, require certain health care providers to obtain a certification of their economic necessity from a state board before opening or undertaking a major expansion. We conduct the first systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis of these laws.MethodsWe review 90 articles to summarize the evidence on how certificate of need laws affect regulatory costs, health expenditures, health outcomes, and access to care. We use the findings from the systematic review to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of CON.ResultsThe literature provides mixed results, on average finding that CON increases health expenditures and overall elderly mortality while reducing heart surgery mortality. Our cost-effectiveness analysis estimates that the costs of CON laws somewhat exceed their benefits, although our estimates are quite uncertain.ConclusionsThe literature has not yet reached a definitive conclusion on how CON laws affect health expenditures, outcomes, or access to care. While more and higher quality research is needed to reach confident conclusions, our cost-effectiveness analysis based on the existing literature shows that the expected costs of CON exceed its benefits.
| S-EPMC7427974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreaks have become common in large nursing homes, placing not only residents but also staff and community members at risk for infection. However, the relationship between larger nursing homes and the community spread of SARS-CoV-2 has not yet been documented.ObjectiveTo examine the association between county average nursing home bed size and presence of certificate of need (CON) laws, which influence nursing home size, with county-level SARS-CoV-2 prevalence over time.DesignCross-sectional study using county-level data from March 11 through June 12, 2020.ParticipantsAll US counties with at least one nursing home (n = 2,883).Main measuresThe main explanatory variables were county average nursing home bed size and presence of a CON law. The main outcome was the cumulative number of SARS-CoV-2 cases on each day of the study period adjusted for county population size and density, demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, total nursing home bed supply, other health care supply measures, epidemic stage, and census region.Key resultsBy June 12, a between-county difference in average nursing home size equal to 1 bed was associated with 3.92 additional SARS-COV-2 cases (95% CI = 2.14 to 5.69; P < 0.001), on average, and counties subject to CON laws had 104.53 additional SARS-CoV-2 cases (95% CI = 7.68 to 201.38; P < 0.05), on average. Counties with larger nursing homes also demonstrated higher growth in the frequency of SARS-COV-2 throughout the study period.ConclusionsAt the county level, average nursing home size and CON law presence was associated with a greater frequency of SARS-CoV-2 cases. Controlling the impact of the coronavirus 2019 pandemic may require additional resources for communities with larger nursing homes and more attention towards long-term care policies.
| S-EPMC7842391 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To test whether state Certificate of Need (CON) regulations influence procedural mortality or the provision of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).Medicare inpatient claims obtained for 1989-2002 for patients age 65+ who received CABG or PCI.We used differences-in-differences regression analysis to compare states that dropped CON during the sample period with states that kept the regulations. We examined procedural mortality, the number of hospitals in the state performing CABG or PCI, mean hospital volume, and statewide procedure volume for CABG and PCI.States that dropped CON experienced lower CABG mortality rates relative to states that kept CON, although the differential is not permanent. No such mortality difference is found for PCI. Dropping CON is associated with more providers statewide and lower mean hospital volume for both CABG and PCI. However, statewide procedure counts remain the same.We find no evidence that CON regulations are associated with higher quality CABG or PCI. Future research should examine whether the greater number of hospitals performing revascularization after CON removal raises expenditures due to the building of more facilities, or lowers expenditures due to enhanced price competition.
| S-EPMC2677050 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Certificate of need ( CON ) regulations are intended to coordinate new healthcare services, limit expansion of unnecessary new infrastructure, and limit healthcare costs. However, there is limited information about the association of CON regulations with the appropriateness and outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions ( PCI ). The study sought to characterize the association between state CON regulations and PCI appropriateness. Methods and Results We used data from the American College of Cardiology's Cath PCI Registry to analyze 1 268 554 PCI s performed at 1297 hospitals between January 2010 and December 2011. We used the Appropriate Use Criteria to classify PCI procedures as appropriate, maybe appropriate, or rarely appropriate and used Chi-square analyses to assess whether the proportions of PCI s in each Appropriate Use Criteria category varied depending on whether the procedure had been performed in a state with or without CON regulations. Analyses were repeated stratified by whether or not the procedure had been performed in the setting of an acute coronary syndrome ( ACS ). Among 1 268 554 PCI procedures, 674 384 (53.2%) were performed within 26 CON states. The proportion of PCI s classified as rarely appropriate in CON states was slightly lower compared with non- CON states (3.7% versus 4.0%, P<0.01). Absolute differences were larger among non- ACS PCI (23.1% versus 25.0% [ P<0.01]) and were not statistically significantly different in ACS (0.62% versus 0.63% [ P>0.05]). Conclusions States with CON had lower proportions of rarely appropriate PCI s, but the absolute differences were small. These findings suggest that CON regulations alone may not limit rarely appropriate PCI among patients with and without ACS .
| S-EPMC6497347 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In over half of US states, health planning boards monitor and control the supply of health care through certificate of need (CON) laws. The COVID-19 pandemic led several states to impose moratoria on CON regulations, hoping to bolster hospital and skilled nursing facility (SNF) beds. Using a difference-in-difference research design, we leverage 2015 to 2021 cost report data from SNFs to study the association between COVID-related CON moratoria and health care supply. Counties that imposed moratoria experienced a slight decline in per-capita SNF bed count. However, once adjusted for potential differential shocks in pre-pandemic high utilization counties, we find little evidence that moratoria led to increased nursing home capacity, overall or by urbanicity. In the context of nursing homes, we conclude that CON deregulation was relatively ineffective at mitigating pandemic-era supply concerns.
| S-EPMC11375671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceCertificate of need laws provide state-level regulation of health system expenditure. These laws are intended to limit spending and control hospital expansion in order to prevent excess capacity and improve quality of care. Several states have recently introduced legislation to modify or repeal these regulations, as encouraged by executive order 13813, issued in October 2017 by the Trump administration.ObjectiveTo evaluate the difference in markers of hospital activity and quality by state certificate of need status. These markers include hospital procedural volume, hospital market share, county-level procedures per 10 000 persons, and patient-level postoperative outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsA cross-sectional study involving Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who underwent 1 of the following 10 procedures from January 1, 2016, through November 30, 2018: total knee or hip arthroplasty, coronary artery bypass grafting, colectomy, ventral hernia repair, lower extremity vascular bypass, lung resection, pancreatic resection, cystectomy, or esophagectomy.ExposuresState certificate of need regulation status as determined by data from the National Conference of State Legislatures.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes of interest included hospital procedural volume; hospital market share (range, 0-1; reflecting 0%-100% of market share); county-level procedures per 10 000 persons; and patient-level postoperative 30-day mortality, surgical site infection, and readmission.ResultsA total of 1 545 952 patients (58.0% women; median age 72 years; interquartile range, 68-77 years) at 3631 hospitals underwent 1 of the 10 operations. Of these patients, 468 236 (30.3%) underwent procedures in the 15 states without certificate of need regulations and 1 077 716 (69.7%) in the 35 states with certificate of need regulations. The total number of procedures ranged between 729 855 total knee arthroplasties (47.21%) and 4558 esophagectomies (0.29%). When comparing states without vs with certificate of need regulations, there were no significant differences in overall hospital procedural volume (median hospital procedure volume, 241 vs 272 operations per hospital for 3 years; absolute difference, 31; 95% CI, -27.64 to 89.64; P = .30). There were no statistically significant differences between states without vs with certificate of need regulations for median hospital market share (median, 28% vs 52%; absolute difference, 24%; 95% CI, -5% to 55%; P = .11); procedure rates per 10 000 Medicare-eligible population (median, 239.23 vs 205.41 operations per Medicare-eligible population in 3 years; absolute difference, 33.82; 95% CI, -84.08 to 16.43; P = .19); or 30-day mortality (1.17% vs 1.33%, odds ratio [OR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.16; P = .52), surgical site infection (1.24% vs 1.25%; OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.04; P = .21), or readmission rate (9.69% vs 8.40%; OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.12; P = .19).Conclusions and relevanceAmong Medicare beneficiaries who underwent a range of surgical procedures from 2016 through 2018, there were no significant differences in markers of hospital volume or quality between states without vs with certificate of need laws. Policy makers should consider reevaluating whether the current approach to certificate of need regulation is achieving the intended objectives and whether those objectives should be updated.
| S-EPMC7686860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Certificate of Need (CON) laws are optional from state to state, and are meant to limit proliferation of certain unnecessary medical facilities. Theoretically, CON should limit the use of IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy) in the population who likely would benefit from it the least: older or debilitated men with low risk prostate cancer. We evaluated the effect of CON on IMRT use in these patients in a population-based cohort. METHODS AND MATERIALS:Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database linked with Medicare files, we identified male residents of SEER regions who were diagnosed in 2004-2009 with low- risk prostate cancer (T1, Gleason≤6, PSA<10) and were either ≥70 years old or ≥65 years old with Charlson comorbidity score ≥ 2. The endpoint was percentage of newly diagnosed patients who were treated with IMRT within 12 month of cancer diagnosis. Logistic regression was used to assess the impact of CON laws on IMRT use. RESULTS:Over 37% (4,491) of the patients came from states with radiation oncology CON laws, whereas 63% (7,572) came from non-CON states. IMRT was performed on 30% of CON patients versus 28% of non-CON patients. Logistic regression analysis revealed that IMRT was utilized more often in CON states than in non-CON states, odds ratio (OR) 1.13 (95% CI 1.04-1.23, p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS:CON laws do not effectively limit use of IMRT in older or debilitated patients with low risk prostate cancer.
| S-EPMC5648073 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveWe have previously reported the combined effect of SNPs perturbing insulin signaling (ENPP1 K121Q, rs1044498; IRS1 G972R, rs1801278; TRIB3 Q84R, rs2295490) on insulin resistance (IR), type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular events. We here investigated whether such a combined effect affects also all-cause mortality in a sample of 1851 Whites of European ancestry.MethodsWe investigated a first sample of 721 patients, 232 deaths, 3389 person-years (py). Replication was assessed in two samples of patients with T2D: the Gargano Mortality Study (GMS) of 714 patients, 127 deaths, 5426 py and the Joslin Kidney Study (JKS) comprising 416 patients, 214 deaths, 5325 py.ResultsIn the first sample, individuals carrying 1 or ≥ 2 risk alleles had 33% (p = 0.06) and 51% (p = 0.02) increased risk of mortality, as compared with individuals with no risk alleles. A similar, though not significant, trend was obtained in the two replication samples only for subject carrying ≥ 2 risk alleles. In a pooled analysis, individuals carrying ≥ 2 risk alleles had higher mortality rate as compared to those carrying 0 risk alleles (HR = 1.34, 95%CI = 1.08-1.67; p = 0.008), and as compared to those carrying only one risk allele (HR = 1.41, 95%CI = 1.13-1.75; p = 0.002). This association was independent from several possible confounders including sex, age, BMI, hypertension and diabetes status.ConclusionOur data suggest that variants affecting insulin signaling exert a joint effect on all-cause mortality and is consistent with a role of abnormal insulin signaling on mortality risk.
| S-EPMC4294190 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Studies show that raising the minimum wage in a US state above the federal minimum wage can reduce infant mortality rates in those states. Some states have raised their minimum wage in recent decades, while many others did not, and have prohibited local authorities from doing so by enacting preemption laws. This study investigates how the recent emergence of state preemption laws that remove local authority to raise the minimum wage has affected infant mortality rates. Using county- and state- level data spanning 2001 through 2018, this study models infant mortality rates as a function of minimum wage levels, controlling for confounders. The estimated model, combined with information on the timing, location, and level of preempted minimum wages, is then used to estimate the number of infant deaths that occurred in 2018 that could be attributed to state preemption of local minimum wage increases. In the 9 largest (pop. > 250,000) metro counties most directly affected by state preemption, we estimate that in 2018, 25 infant deaths were attributable to preemption. This equates to a 5.4% reduction in these counties' infant mortality rate. When considering all large metro counties in preemption states, as many as 605 infant deaths could be attributed to preemption. State preemption laws that remove local authority to enact health-promoting legislation, such as minimum wage increases, are a significant threat to population health. The growing tide of these laws, particularly since 2010, may be contributing to recent troubling trends in US life expectancy.
| S-EPMC7956067 | biostudies-literature