Dataset Information

Multicentre methodological study to create a publicly available score of hospital financial standing in the USA.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To create a straightforward scoring procedure based on widely available, inexpensive financial data that provides an assessment of the financial health of a hospital.

Design

Methodological study.

Setting

Multicentre study.

Participants

All hospitals and health systems reporting the required financial metrics in the USA in 2017 were included for a total of 1075 participants.

Interventions

We examined a list of 232 hospital financial indicators and used existing models and financial literature to select 30 metrics that sufficiently describe hospital operations. In a set of hospital financial data from 2017, we used principal coordinate analysis to assess collinearity among variables and eliminated redundant variables. We isolated 10 unique variables, each assigned a weight equal to the share of its coefficient in a regression onto Moody's Credit Rating, our predefined gold standard. The sum of weighted variables is a single composite score named the Yale Hospital Financial Score (YHFS).

Primary outcome measures

Ability to reproduce both financial trends from a 'gold-standard' metric and known associations with non-fiscal data.

Results

The validity of the YHFS was evaluated by: (1) cross-validating it with previously excluded data; (2) comparing it to existing models and (3) replicating known associations with non-fiscal data. Ten per cent of the initial dataset had been reserved for validation and was not used in creating the model; the YHFS predicts 96.7% of the variation in this reserved sample, demonstrating reproducibility. The YHFS predicts 90.5% and 88.8% of the variation in Moody's and Standard and Poor's bond ratings, respectively, supporting its validity. As expected, larger hospitals had higher YHFS scores whereas a greater share of Medicare discharges correlated with lower YHFS scores.

Conclusions

We created a reliable and publicly available composite score of hospital financial stability.

SUBMITTER: Zinoviev R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8311305 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Many LMICs have implemented Publicly Funded Health Insurance (PFHI) programmes to improve access and financial protection. The national PFHI scheme implemented in India for a decade has been recently modified and expanded to cover free hospital care for 500 million persons. Since increase in annual cover amount is one of the main design modifications in the new programme, the relevant policy question is whether such design change can improve financial protection for hospital care. An evaluation of state-specific PFHI programmes with vertical cover larger than RSBY can help answer this question. Three states in Southern India - Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu have been pioneers in implementing PFHI with a large insurance cover. METHODS:The current study was meant to evaluate the PFHI in above three states in improving utilisation of hospital services and financial protection against expenses of hospitalization. Two cross-sections from National Sample Survey's health rounds, the 60th round done in 2004 and the 71st round done in 2014 were analysed. Instrumental Variable method was applied to address endogeneity or the selection problem in insurance. RESULTS:Enrollment under PFHI was not associated with increase in utilisation of hospital care in the three states. Private hospitals dominated the empanelment of facilities under PFHI as well as utilisation. Out of Pocket Expenditure and incidence of Catastrophic Health Expenditure did not decrease with enrollment under PFHI in the three states. The size of Out of Pocket Expenditure was significantly greater for utilisation in private sector, irrespective of insurance enrollment. CONCLUSION:PFHI in the three states used substantially larger vertical cover than national scheme in 2014. The three states are known for their good governance. Yet, the PFHI programmes in all three states failed in fulfilling their fundamental purpose. Increasing vertical cover of PFHI and using either 'Trusts' or Insurance-companies as purchasers may not give desired results in absence of adequate regulation. The study raises doubts regarding effectiveness of contracting under PFHIs to influence provider-behavior in the Indian context. Further research is required to find solutions for addressing gaps that contribute to poor financial outcomes for patients under PFHI.