Access, Quality, And Financial Performance Of Rural Hospitals Following Health System Affiliation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: O'Hanlon CE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7004480 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Critical access hospitals (CAHs) play a crucial role in the US rural safety net. Current policy efforts have focused primarily on helping these small, isolated hospitals remain financially viable to ensure access for individuals living in rural areas in the United States; however, little is known about the quality of care they provide or the outcomes their patients achieve.To examine the quality of care and patient outcomes at CAHs and to understand why patterns of care might differ for CAHs vs non-CAHs.A retrospective analysis in 4738 US hospitals of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (10,703 for CAHs vs 469,695 for non-CAHs), congestive heart failure (CHF) (52,927 for CAHs vs 958,790 for non-CAHs), and pneumonia (86,359 for CAHs vs 773,227 for non-CAHs) who were discharged in 2008-2009.Clinical capabilities, performance on processes of care, and 30-day mortality rates, adjusted for age, sex, race, and medical comorbidities.Compared with other hospitals (n = 3470), 1268 CAHs (26.8%) were less likely to have intensive care units (380 [30.0%] vs 2581 [74.4%], P < .001), cardiac catheterization capabilities (6 [0.5%] vs 1654 [47.7%], P < .001), and at least basic electronic health records (80 [6.5%] vs 445 [13.9%], P < .001). The CAHs had lower performance on processes of care than non-CAHs for all 3 conditions examined (concordance with Hospital Quality Alliance process measures for AMI, 91.0% [95% CI, 89.7%-92.3%] vs 97.8% [95% CI, 97.7%-97.9%]; for CHF, 80.6% [95% CI, 79.2%-82.0%] vs 93.5% [95% CI, 93.3%-93.7%]; and for pneumonia, 89.3% [95% CI, 88.6%-90.0%] vs 93.7% [95% CI, 93.6%-93.9%]; P < .001 for each). Patients admitted to CAHs had higher 30-day mortality rates for each condition than those admitted to non-CAHs (for AMI: 23.5% vs 16.2%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.61-1.80; P < .001; for CHF: 13.4% vs 10.9%; adjusted OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.23-1.32; P < .001; and for pneumonia: 14.1% vs 12.1%; adjusted OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.16-1.24; P < .001).Compared with non-CAHs, CAHs had fewer clinical capabilities, worse measured processes of care, and higher mortality rates for patients with AMI, CHF, or pneumonia.
| S-EPMC3337777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIn 2016, Georgia implemented the Rural Hospital Tax Credit Program, which allows taxpayers to receive a tax credit for contributions to qualifying rural hospitals in the state. Empirical evidence of the program's association with the viability of the state's rural hospitals is needed.ObjectiveTo examine the association of the tax credit program with the financial health of participating rural hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThis longitudinal cross-sectional study used hospital financial data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for 2015 to 2019. A difference-in-differences analytic approach was used to examine the association of the tax credit program with rural hospital financial health. Study participants included Georgia rural hospitals eligible to participate in the program. Comparison hospitals were selected from the southern states of Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee.ExposuresHospital participation in the Georgia Rural Hospital Tax Credit Program.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome of the study was financial health measured with total margin, days cash on hand, debt-asset ratio, and average age of plant as well as a Financial Strength Index (FSI), which combined the previous measures to assess overall financial strength.ResultsThe analytical sample included a balanced panel of 136 hospitals, with 47 Georgia Rural Hospital Tax Credit Program participants (18 [38%] critical access hospitals; 5 [11%] system affiliated; mean [SD] bed count, 60 [47]; mean [SD] Medicare inpatient mix, 52% [16]) and 89 comparison hospitals (43 [48%] critical access hospitals; 24 [27%] system affiliated; mean [SD] bed count, 52 [41]; mean [SD] Medicare inpatient mix, 67% [18]). Two years after implementation, program participation was associated with a 23% increased probability of good or excellent financial health (b = 0.23; 95% CI, 0.10-0.37; P < .001) and a 6.7-point increase in total margin (b = 6.67; 95% CI, 3.61-9.73; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThese early findings suggest that the Georgia Rural Hospital Tax Credit Program is associated with improvements in hospital financial health; however, additional studies are needed to assess the program's long-term impact on the financial sustainability of Georgia's rural hospitals.
| S-EPMC8303099 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop and explore the characteristics of a novel "nearest neighbor" methodology for creating peer groups for health care facilities.Data sourcesData were obtained from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) databases. STATISTICAL METHODS AND FINDINGS: Peer groups are developed by first calculating the multidimensional Euclidean distance between each of 133 VA medical centers based on 16 facility characteristics. Each medical center then serves as the center for its own peer group, and the nearest neighbor facilities in terms of Euclidean distance comprise the peer facilities. We explore the attributes and characteristics of the nearest neighbor peer groupings. In addition, we construct standard cluster analysis-derived peer groups and compare the characteristics of groupings from the two methodologies.ConclusionsThe novel peer group methodology presented here results in groups where each medical center is at the center of its own peer group. Possible advantages over other peer group methodologies are that facilities are never on the "edge" of a group and group size-and thus group dispersion-is determined by the researcher. Peer groups with these characteristics may be more appealing to some researchers and administrators than standard cluster analysis and may thus strengthen organizational buy-in for financial and quality comparisons.
| S-EPMC2677055 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the impact of hospital affiliation, centralization, and managed care plan ownership on inpatient cost and quality.Data sourcesInpatient discharges from 3,957 community hospitals in 44 states and American Hospital Association Annual Survey data from 2010 to 2012.Study designWe conducted a retrospective longitudinal regression analysis using hierarchical modeling of discharges clustered within hospitals.Data collectionDetailed discharge data including costs, length of stay, and patient characteristics from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases were merged with hospital survey data from the American Hospital Association.Principal findingsHospitals affiliated with health systems had a higher cost per discharge and better quality of care compared with independent hospitals. Centralized systems in particular had the highest cost per discharge and longest stays. Independent hospitals with managed care plans had a higher cost per discharge and better quality of care compared with other independent hospitals.ConclusionsIncreasing prevalence of health systems and hospital managed care ownership may lead to higher quality but are unlikely to reduce hospital discharge costs. Encouraging participation in innovative payment and delivery reform models, such as accountable care organizations, may be more powerful options.
| S-EPMC5785316 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIntegration of physician practices into health systems composed of hospitals and multispecialty practices is increasing in the era of value-based payment. It is unknown how clinicians who affiliate with such health systems perform under the new mandatory Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) relative to their peers.ObjectiveTo assess the relationship between the health system affiliations of clinicians and their performance scores and value-based reimbursement under the 2019 MIPS.Design, setting, and participantsPublicly reported data on 636 552 clinicians working at outpatient clinics across the US were used to assess the association of the affiliation status of clinicians within the 609 health systems with their 2019 final MIPS performance score and value-based reimbursement (both based on clinician performance in 2017), adjusting for clinician, patient, and practice area characteristics.ExposuresHealth system affiliation vs no affiliation.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was final MIPS performance score (range, 0-100; higher scores intended to represent better performance). The secondary outcome was MIPS payment adjustment, including negative (penalty) payment adjustment, positive payment adjustment, and bonus payment adjustment.ResultsThe final sample included 636 552 clinicians (41% female, 83% physicians, 50% in primary care, 17% in rural areas), including 48.6% who were affiliated with a health system. Compared with unaffiliated clinicians, system-affiliated clinicians were significantly more likely to be female (46% vs 37%), primary care physicians (36% vs 30%), and classified as safety net clinicians (12% vs 10%) and significantly less likely to be specialists (44% vs 55%) (P < .001 for each). The mean final MIPS performance score for system-affiliated clinicians was 79.0 vs 60.3 for unaffiliated clinicians (absolute mean difference, 18.7 [95% CI, 18.5 to 18.8]). The percentage receiving a negative (penalty) payment adjustment was 2.8% for system-affiliated clinicians vs 13.7% for unaffiliated clinicians (absolute difference, -10.9% [95% CI, -11.0% to -10.7%]), 97.1% vs 82.6%, respectively, for those receiving a positive payment adjustment (absolute difference, 14.5% [95% CI, 14.3% to 14.6%]), and 73.9% vs 55.1% for those receiving a bonus payment adjustment (absolute difference, 18.9% [95% CI, 18.6% to 19.1%]).Conclusions and relevanceClinician affiliation with a health system was associated with significantly better 2019 MIPS performance scores. Whether this represents differences in quality of care or other factors requires additional research.
| S-EPMC7489823 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The research purposed in this paper is to investigate the impact of the health information technology on hospital performance through the health information quality as mediating variable, as new evidence from the teaching hospitals in the north of Jordan. Research design and methodology approach based on a survey that is conducted to collect the requested data to develop a model connect between the health information technologies, health information quality and hospital performance by using the Structural Equation Modeling approach. The research findings show that there is an intertwined and reciprocal relation between Health Information Technologies (HITs), hospital performance, and health information quality. HITs have direct positive impacts on both hospital performance and health information quality. Health information quality has also a direct impact on hospital performance. Besides, health information quality functioned as a partial mediator between HITs and hospital performance. The study did not examine the factors that influence the relationship between HITs, hospital performance and health information quality. This paper is evidence for the investor in the healthcare sector to invest more in HITs and health information quality, where the expected results are productivity improvement, performance leveraging and error reduction. The research originality is to introduce new evidence support literature form the Middle East countries is the main contribution of this paper.
| S-EPMC7557885 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate the effect of minimum nurse staffing ratios on California acute care hospitals' financial performance.Data sources/study settingSecondary data from Medicare cost reports, the American Hospital Association's (AHA) Annual Survey, and the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) are combined from 2000 to 2006 for 203 hospitals in California and 407 hospitals in 12 comparison states.Study designThe study employs a difference-in-difference analytical approach. Hospitals are grouped into quartiles based on pre-regulation nurse staffing levels in adult medical-surgical and pediatric units (quartile 1=lowest staffing). Differences in operating margin, operating expenses per day, and inpatient operating expenses per discharge for California hospitals within a staffing quartile during the period of regulation are compared to differences at hospitals in comparison states during the same period.Data collection/extraction methodsHospital data from Medicare cost reports are merged with nurse staffing measures obtained from AHA and from OSPHD.Principal findingsRelative to hospitals in comparison states, operating margins declined significantly for California hospitals in quartiles 2 and 3. Operating expenses increased significantly in quartiles 1, 2, and 3.ConclusionsImplementation of minimum nurse staffing legislation in California put substantial financial pressure on some hospitals.
| S-EPMC3337946 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are significant health technology gaps between Latinos and non-Hispanic whites and between first- and second-generation Latinos.ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine disparities in Web-based health information-seeking behavior (HISB) and patient portal use among Latinos, taking into account nativity and subethnic affiliation.MethodsWe analyzed US-born, non-Hispanic whites and Latinos adults (N=49,259) and adult internet users (N=36,214) in the 2015 to 2016 National Health Interview Survey using a binary logistic regression controlling for individual difference level variables. Outcomes were internet use, HISB (health information-seeking online and using a chat group for health information), and patient portal use (using a computer to schedule an appointment, filling a prescription, and communicating with a provider).ResultsWe found that US-born Mexicans (odds ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.66-0.99), foreign-born Mexicans (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.29-0.42), foreign-born Puerto Ricans (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44-0.87), foreign-born Central and South Americans (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.33-0.53), and foreign-born other Latinos (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.24-0.49) had lower odds of using the internet than US-born non-Hispanic whites. The relationship between subgroup affiliation and Web-based HISB varied by type of technology. US-born Mexicans (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66-0.9), foreign-born Mexicans (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.43-0.61), foreign-born Central and South Americans (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.43-0.64), and foreign-born other Latinos (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.4-0.79) had lower odds of looking up health information online than US-born non-Hispanic whites. Controlling for age, sex, education, income to federal poverty level, and region, foreign-born Central and South Americans (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.92) and foreign-born other Latinos (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.1-0.68) had lower odds of filling a prescription using a computer than US-born non-Hispanic whites. Foreign-born Mexicans (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.72) and foreign-born Central and South Americans (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-0.99) have lower odds of emailing a health care provider than US-born non-Hispanic whites. Posthoc analyses were conducted among Mexican-Americans to see if age was significant in predicting Web-based HISB or other patient portal use. We found individuals aged 18 to 30 years had higher odds of using the internet (OR 3.46, 95% CI 2.61-4.59) and lower odds of looking up health information online (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.96). A posthoc analysis was conducted among Mexican-Americans to see if nativity predicted Web-based HISB and patient portal use. We found that US-born individuals had higher odds (OR 52.9, 95% CI 1.2-1.93) of looking up health information online compared with foreign-born individuals.ConclusionsWe found Latino subgroups do not use health information channels equally, and attempts to target Latinos should take ethnicity and nativity into account.
| S-EPMC6488958 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Banner Health, a large delivery system in Maricopa County, Arizona, entered into both Medicare and commercial insurance contracts that varied the amount of financial risk that Banner assumed. Rates of utilization and spending under these various contracts were investigated. STUDY DESIGN:Prior to 2012, Banner held Medicare Advantage (MA) contracts, and in 2012 it began as a Medicare Pioneer accountable care organization (ACO). Banner also introduced a commercial ACO contract in that year. We compared risk-adjusted healthcare utilization and spending in the MA plan, the ACO, and a local traditional Medicare (TM) comparison group. We also compared risk-adjusted utilization and spending in Banner's commercial ACO with that of a comparison group drawn from the same employment groups who were not attributed to Banner providers. METHODS:We used claims and encounter data to measure utilization and spending. We risk adjusted using CMS and HHS Hierarchical Condition Categories. RESULTS:Within Medicare, MA enrollees had lower risk-adjusted utilization and total spending than either the Pioneer ACO participants or a local TM comparison group. Participation in the Pioneer ACO program was associated with a greater reduction in hospitalization rates for ACO patients relative to local TM patients served by non-ACO providers, but the effect on total medical spending was ambiguous. Risk-adjusted differences between the commercial ACO group and the fee-for-service comparison group were generally small. CONCLUSIONS:The results are consistent with CMS' efforts to shift reimbursement away from pure fee-for-service reimbursement.
| S-EPMC7412600 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo test the hypothesis that health systems provide better care to patients with high needs by comparing differences in quality between system-affiliated and nonaffiliated physician organizations (POs) and to examine variability in quality across health systems.Data sources2015 Medicare Data on Provider Practice and Specialty linked physicians to POs. Medicare Provider Enrollment, Chain, and Ownership System (PECOS) and IRS Form 990 data identified health system affiliations. Fee-for-service Medicare enrollment and claims data were used to examine quality.Study designThis cross-sectional analysis of beneficiaries with high needs, defined as having more than twice the expected spending of an average beneficiary, examined six quality measures: continuity of care, follow-up visits after hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits, ED visits, all-cause readmissions, and ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations. Using a matched-pair design, we estimated beneficiary-level regression models with PO random effects to compare quality of care in system-affiliated and nonaffiliated POs. We then limited the sample to system-affiliated POs and estimated models with system random effects to examine variability in quality across systems.Principal findingsAmong 2 323 301 beneficiaries with high needs, 52.3% received care from system-affiliated POs. Rates of ED visits were statistically significantly different in system-affiliated POs (117.5 per 100) and nonaffiliated POs (106.8 per 100, P < .0001). Small differences in the other five quality measures were observed across a range of sensitivity analyses. Among systems, substantial variation was observed for rates of continuity of care (90% of systems had rates between 70.8% and 89.4%) and follow-up after ED visits (90% of systems had rates between 56.9% and 73.5%).ConclusionsSmall differences in quality of care were observed among beneficiaries with high needs receiving care from system POs and nonsystem POs. Health systems may not confer hypothesized quality advantages to patients with high needs.
| S-EPMC7720706 | biostudies-literature