Dataset Information

Is Hospital Nurse Staffing Legislation in the Public's Interest?: An Observational Study in New York State.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The 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.

Objectives

To examine variation in patient-to-nurse staffing in NY hospitals and its association with adverse outcomes (ie, mortality and avoidable costs).

Research design

Cross-sectional data on nurse staffing in 116 acute care general hospitals in NY are linked with Medicare claims data.

Subjects

A total of 417,861 Medicare medical and surgical patients.

Measures

Patient-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.

Results

Hospital 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.

Conclusions

Patient-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.

SUBMITTER: Lasater KB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8026733 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.