Staffing Trends in Magnet and Non-Magnet Hospitals After State Legislation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Evidence suggests that Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals differ with respect to quality of care.Purpose
Our study examined registered nurse (RN) staffing over time in Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals using unit-level, publicly available data in New Jersey.Methods
A secondary analysis of longitudinal RN staffing data was conducted using mandated, publicly reported data of 64 hospitals representing 12 nursing specialties across 8 years (2008-2015). Staffing ratios were trended over time to compare RN staffing changes in Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals.Results
Staffing was comparable in Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals for 9 of 12 specialties. On average, from 2008 until 2015, RN staffing slightly increased, with a greater percent increase in Magnet hospitals (6.9%) than in non-Magnet hospitals (4.7%).Conclusions
Over 8 years in New Jersey, RN staffing improved in Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals. Although there was a slight increase for Magnet hospitals, there was no meaningful difference in staffing for all 12 specialties.
SUBMITTER: de Cordova PB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8011811 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
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:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to addresses the basic question of whether alternative legislative approaches are effective in encouraging hospitals to increase nurse staffing.MethodsUsing 16 years of nationally representative hospital-level data from the American Hospital Association (AHA) annual survey, we employed a difference-in-difference design to compare changes in productive hours per patient day for registered nurses (RNs), licensed practical/vocational nurses (LPNs), and nursing assistive personnel (NAP) in the state that mandated staffing ratios, states that legislated staffing committees, and states that legislated public reporting, to changes in states that did not implement any nurse staffing legislation before and after the legislation was implemented. We constructed multivariate linear regression models to assess the effects with hospital and year fixed effects, controlling for hospital-level characteristics and state-level factors.ResultsCompared with states with no legislation, the state that legislated minimum staffing ratios had an 0.996 (P<0.01) increase in RN hours per patient day and 0.224 (P<0.01) increase in NAP hours after the legislation was implemented, but no statistically significant changes in RN or NAP hours were found in states that legislated a staffing committee or public reporting. The staffing committee approach had a negative effect on LPN hours (difference-in-difference=-0.076, P<0.01), while the public reporting approach had a positive effect on LPN hours (difference-in-difference=0.115, P<0.01). There was no statistically significant effect of staffing mandate on LPN hours.ConclusionsWhen we included California in the comparison, our model suggests that neither the staffing committee nor the public reporting approach alone are effective in increasing hospital RN staffing, although the public reporting approach appeared to have a positive effect on LPN staffing. When we excluded California form the model, public reporting also had a positive effect on RN staffing. Future research should examine patient outcomes associated with these policies, as well as potential cost savings for hospitals from reduced nurse turnover rates.
| S-EPMC8428863 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hospital executives pursue external recognition to improve market share and demonstrate institutional commitment to quality of care. The Magnet Recognition Program of the American Nurses Credentialing Center identifies hospitals that epitomize nursing excellence, but it is not clear that receiving Magnet recognition improves patient outcomes. Using Medicare data on patients hospitalized for coronary artery bypass graft surgery, colectomy, or lower extremity bypass in 1998-2010, we compared rates of risk-adjusted thirty-day mortality and failure to rescue (death after a postoperative complication) between Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals matched on hospital characteristics. Surgical patients treated in Magnet hospitals, compared to those treated in non-Magnet hospitals, were 7.7 percent less likely to die within thirty days and 8.6 percent less likely to die after a postoperative complication. Across the thirteen-year study period, patient outcomes were significantly better in Magnet hospitals than in non-Magnet hospitals. However, outcomes did not improve for hospitals after they received Magnet recognition, which suggests that the Magnet program recognizes existing excellence and does not lead to additional improvements in surgical outcomes.
| S-EPMC4462174 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Safe Staffing for Quality Care Act under consideration in the New York (NY) state assembly would require hospitals to staff enough nurses to safely care for patients. The impact of regulated minimum patient-to-nurse staffing ratios in acute care hospitals in NY is unknown.ObjectivesTo examine variation in patient-to-nurse staffing in NY hospitals and its association with adverse outcomes (ie, mortality and avoidable costs).Research designCross-sectional data on nurse staffing in 116 acute care general hospitals in NY are linked with Medicare claims data.SubjectsA total of 417,861 Medicare medical and surgical patients.MeasuresPatient-to-nurse staffing is the primary predictor variable. Outcomes include in-hospital mortality, length of stay, 30-day readmission, and estimated costs using Medicare-specific cost-to-charge ratios.ResultsHospital staffing ranged from 4.3 to 10.5 patients per nurse (P/N), and averaged 6.3 P/N. After adjusting for potential confounders each additional patient per nurse, for surgical and medical patients, respectively, was associated with higher odds of in-hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR)=1.13, P=0.0262; OR=1.13, P=0.0019], longer lengths of stay (incidence rate ratio=1.09, P=0.0008; incidence rate ratio=1.05, P=0.0023), and higher odds of 30-day readmission (OR=1.08, P=0.0002; OR=1.06, P=0.0003). Were hospitals staffed at the 4:1 P/N ratio proposed in the legislation, we conservatively estimated 4370 lives saved and $720 million saved over the 2-year study period in shorter lengths of stay and avoided readmissions.ConclusionsPatient-to-nurse staffing varies substantially across NY hospitals and higher ratios adversely affect patients. Our estimates of potential lives and costs saved substantially underestimate potential benefits of improved hospital nurse staffing.
| S-EPMC8026733 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether, following implementation of California's minimum nurse staffing legislation, changes in acuity-adjusted nurse staffing and quality of care in California hospitals outpaced similar changes in hospitals in comparison states without such regulations.Data sources/study settingData from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey of Hospitals, the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, the Hospital Cost Report Information System, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Health Care Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Databases from 2000 to 2006.Study designWe grouped hospitals into quartiles based on their preregulation staffing levels and used a difference-in-difference approach to compare changes in staffing and in quality of care in California hospitals to changes over the same time period in hospitals in 12 comparison states without minimum staffing legislation.Data collection/extraction methodsWe merged data from the above data sources to obtain measures of nurse staffing and quality of care. We used Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Patient Safety Indicators to measure quality.Principal findingsWith few exceptions, California hospitals increased nurse staffing levels over time significantly more than did comparison state hospitals. Failure to rescue decreased significantly more in some California hospitals, and infections due to medical care increased significantly more in some California hospitals than in comparison state hospitals. There were no statistically significant changes in either respiratory failure or postoperative sepsis.ConclusionsFollowing implementation of California's minimum nurse staffing legislation, nurse staffing in California increased significantly more than it did in comparison states' hospitals, but the extent of the increases depended upon preregulation staffing levels; there were mixed effects on quality.
| S-EPMC3626342 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Affordable Care Act's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) penalizes hospitals based on excess readmission rates among Medicare beneficiaries. The aim of the program is to reduce readmissions while aligning hospitals' financial incentives with payers' and patients' quality goals. Many evidence-based interventions that reduce readmissions, such as discharge preparation, care coordination, and patient education, are grounded in the fundamentals of basic nursing care. Yet inadequate staffing can hinder nurses' efforts to carry out these processes of care. We estimated the effect that nurse staffing had on the likelihood that a hospital was penalized under the HRRP. Hospitals with higher nurse staffing had 25 percent lower odds of being penalized compared to otherwise similar hospitals with lower staffing. Investment in nursing is a potential system-level intervention to reduce readmissions that policy makers and hospital administrators should consider in the new regulatory environment as they examine the quality of care delivered to US hospital patients.
| S-EPMC4315496 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough there is evidence that hospitals recognized for nursing excellence--Magnet hospitals--are successful in attracting and retaining nurses, it is uncertain whether Magnet recognition is associated with better patient outcomes than non-Magnets, and if so why.ObjectivesTo determine whether Magnet hospitals have lower risk-adjusted mortality and failure-to-rescue compared with non-Magnet hospitals, and to determine the most likely explanations. METHOD AND STUDY DESIGN: Analysis of linked patient, nurse, and hospital data on 56 Magnet and 508 non-Magnet hospitals. Logistic regression models were used to estimate differences in the odds of mortality and failure-to-rescue for surgical patients treated in Magnet versus non-Magnet hospitals, and to determine the extent to which differences in outcomes can be explained by nursing after accounting for patient and hospital differences.ResultsMagnet hospitals had significantly better work environments and higher proportions of nurses with bachelor's degrees and specialty certification. These nursing factors explained much of the Magnet hospital effect on patient outcomes. However, patients treated in Magnet hospitals had 14% lower odds of mortality (odds ratio 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.98; P=0.02) and 12% lower odds of failure-to-rescue (odds ratio 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.01; P=0.07) while controlling for nursing factors as well as hospital and patient differences.ConclusionsThe lower mortality we find in Magnet hospitals is largely attributable to measured nursing characteristics but there is a mortality advantage above and beyond what we could measure. Magnet recognition identifies existing quality and stimulates further positive organizational behavior that improves patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC3568449 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Public reporting is a tactic that hospitals and other health care facilities use to provide data such as outcomes to clinicians, patients, and payers. Although inadequate registered nurse (RN) staffing has been linked to poor patient outcomes, only eight states in the United States publicly report staffing ratios-five mandated by legislation and the other three electively. We examine nurse staffing trends after the New Jersey (NJ) legislature and governor enacted P.L.1971, c.136 (C.26:2?H-13) on January 24, 2005, mandating that all health care facilities compile, post, and report staffing information. We conduct a secondary analysis of reported data from the State of NJ Department of Health on 73 hospitals in 2008 to 2009 and 72 hospitals in 2010 to 2015. The first aim was to determine if NJ hospitals complied with legislation, and the second was to identify staffing trends postlegislation. On the reports, staffing was operationalized as the number of patients per RN per quarters. We obtained 30 quarterly reports for 2008 through 2015 and cross-checked these reports for data accuracy on the NJ Department of Health website. From these data, we created a longitudinal data set of 13 inpatient units for each hospital (14,158 observations) and merged these data with American Hospital Association Annual Survey data. The number of patients per RN decreased for 10 specialties, and the American Hospital Association data demonstrate a similar trend. Although the number of patients does not account for patient acuity, the decrease in the patients per RN over 7 years indicated the importance of public reporting in improving patient safety.
| S-EPMC6813777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between Magnet RecognitionA and nurse-reported quality of care.MagnetA hospitals are recognized for nursing excellence and quality patient outcomes; however, few studies have explored contributing factors for these superior outcomes.This was a secondary analysis of linked nurse survey data, hospital administrative data, and a listing of American Nurses Credentialing Center Magnet hospitals. Multivariate regressions were modeled before and after propensity score matching to assess the relationship between Magnet status and quality of care. A mediation model assessed the indirect effect of the professional practice environment on quality of care.Nurse-reported quality of care was significantly associated with Magnet Recognition after matching. The professional practice environment mediates the relationship between Magnet status and quality of care.A prominent feature of Magnet hospitals, a professional practice environment that is supportive of nursing, plays a role in explaining why Magnet hospitals have better nurse-reported quality of care.
| S-EPMC5619653 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate variation in Illinois hospital nurse staffing ratios and to determine whether higher nurse workloads are associated with mortality and length of stay for patients, and cost outcomes for hospitals.DesignCross-sectional analysis of multiple data sources including a 2020 survey of nurses linked to patient outcomes data.Setting: 87 acute care hospitals in Illinois.Participants210 493 Medicare patients, 65 years and older, who were hospitalised in a study hospital. 1391 registered nurses employed in direct patient care on a medical-surgical unit in a study hospital.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcomes were 30-day mortality and length of stay. Deaths avoided and cost savings to hospitals were predicted based on results from regression estimates if hospitals were to have staffed at a 4:1 ratio during the study period. Cost savings were computed from reductions in lengths of stay using cost-to-charge ratios.ResultsPatient-to-nurse staffing ratios on medical-surgical units ranged from 4.2 to 7.6 (mean=5.4; SD=0.7). After adjusting for hospital and patient characteristics, the odds of 30-day mortality for each patient increased by 16% for each additional patient in the average nurse's workload (95% CI 1.04 to 1.28; p=0.006). The odds of staying in the hospital a day longer at all intervals increased by 5% for each additional patient in the nurse's workload (95% CI 1.00 to 1.09, p=0.041). If study hospitals staffed at a 4:1 ratio during the 1-year study period, more than 1595 deaths would have been avoided and hospitals would have collectively saved over $117 million.ConclusionsPatient-to-nurse staffing ratios vary considerably across Illinois hospitals. If nurses in Illinois hospital medical-surgical units cared for no more than four patients each, thousands of deaths could be avoided, and patients would experience shorter lengths of stay, resulting in cost-savings for hospitals.
| S-EPMC8655582 | biostudies-literature