The determinants of improvements in health outcomes and of cost reduction in hospital inpatient care

This study aims to address two research questions. First, ‘Can we identify factors that are determinants both of improved health outcomes and of reduced costs for hospitalized patients with one of six common diagnoses?’ Second, ‘Can we identify other factors that are determinants of improved health outcomes for such hospitalized patients but which are not associated with costs?’ The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2003 to 2006 was employed in this study. The total study sample consisted of hospitals which had at least 30 patients each year for the given diagnosis: 954 hospitals for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), 1552 hospitals for congestive heart failure (CHF), 1120 hospitals for stroke (STR), 1283 hospitals for gastrointestinal hemorrhage (GIH), 979 hospitals for hip fracture (HIP), and 1716 hospitals for pneumonia (PNE). This study used simultaneous equations models to investigate the determinants of improvement in health outcomes and of cost reduction in hospital inpatient care for these six common diagnoses. In addition, the study used instrumental variables and two-stage least squares random effect model for unbalanced panel data estimation. The study concluded that a few factors were determinants of high quality and low cost. Specifically, high specialty was the determinant of high quality and low costs for CHF patients; small hospital size was the determinant of high quality and low costs for AMI patients. Furthermore, CHF patients who were treated in Midwest, South, and West region hospitals had better health outcomes and lower hospital costs than patients who were treated in Northeast region hospitals. Gastrointestinal hemorrhage and pneumonia patients who were treated in South region hospitals also had better health outcomes and lower hospital costs than patients who were treated in Northeast region hospitals. This study found that six non-cost factors were related to health outcomes for a few diagnoses: hospital volume, percentage emergency room admissions for a given diagnosis, hospital competition, specialty, bed size, and hospital region.^

The relationship between hospital financial performance and information technology integration strategy selection

In light of the new healthcare regulations, hospitals are increasingly reevaluating their IT integration strategies to meet expanded healthcare information exchange requirements. Nevertheless, hospital executives do not have all the information they need to differentiate between the available strategies and recognize what may better fit their organizational needs. ^ In the interest of providing the desired information, this study explored the relationships between hospital financial performance, integration strategy selection, and strategy change. The integration strategies examined – applied as binary logistic regression dependent variables and in the order from most to least integrated – were Single-Vendor (SV), Best-of-Suite (BoS), and Best-of-Breed (BoB). In addition, the financial measurements adopted as independent variables for the models were two administrative labor efficiency and six industry standard financial ratios designed to provide a broad proxy of hospital financial performance. Furthermore, descriptive statistical analyses were carried out to evaluate recent trends in hospital integration strategy change. Overall six research questions were proposed for this study. ^ The first research question sought to answer if financial performance was related to the selection of integration strategies. The next questions, however, explored whether hospitals were more likely to change strategies or remain the same when there was no external stimulus to change, and if they did change, they would prefer strategies closer to the existing ones. These were followed by a question that inquired if financial performance was also related to strategy change. Nevertheless, rounding up the questions, the last two probed if the new Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act had any impact on the frequency and direction of strategy change. ^ The results confirmed that financial performance is related to both IT integration strategy selection and strategy change, while concurred with prior studies that suggested hospital and environmental characteristics are associated factors as well. Specifically this study noted that the most integrated SV strategy is related to increased administrative labor efficiency and the hybrid BoS strategy is associated with improved financial health (based on operating margin and equity financing ratios). On the other hand, no financial indicators were found to be related to the least integrated BoB strategy, except for short-term liquidity (current ratio) when involving strategy change. ^ Ultimately, this study concluded that when making IT integration strategy decisions hospitals closely follow the resource dependence view of minimizing uncertainty. As each integration strategy may favor certain organizational characteristics, hospitals traditionally preferred not to make strategy changes and when they did, they selected strategies that were more closely related to the existing ones. However, as new regulations further heighten revenue uncertainty while require increased information integration, moving forward, as evidence already suggests a growing trend of organizations shifting towards more integrated strategies, hospitals may be more limited in their strategy selection choices.^

Hospital district viability and Medicaid /market changes

Hospital districts (HD) that serve the uninsured and the needy face new challenges with the implementation of Medicaid managed. The potential loss of Medicaid patients and revenues may affect the ability to cost-shift and subsequently decrease the ability of the HD to meet its legal obligation of providing care for the uninsured. ^ To investigate HD viability in the current market, the aims of this study were to: (1) describe HD's environment, (2) document the HDs strategic response, (3) document changes in the HD's performance (patient volume) and financial status, and (4) determine whether relationships or trends exist between HD strategy, performance and financial status. ^ To achieve these aims, three Texas HDs (Fort Worth, Lubbock, and San Antonio) were selected to be evaluated. For each HD four types of strategic responses were documented and evaluated for change. In addition, the ability of each HD to sustain operations was evaluated by documenting performance and financial status changes (patient volume and financial ratios). A pre-post case study design method was used in which the Medicaid managed care “rollout'” date, at each site, was the central date. First, a descriptive analysis was performed which documented the environment, strategy, financial status, and patient volume of each hospital district. Second, to compare hospital districts, each hospital district was: (i) classified by a risk index, (ii) classified by its strategic response profile, and (iii) given a performance score based upon pre-post changes in patient volume and financial indicators. ^ Results indicated that all three HDs operate in a high risk environment compared to the rest of the nation. Two HDs chose the “Status Quo” response whereas one HD chose the “Competitive Proactive” response. Medicaid patient volume decreased in two of three HDs whereas indigent patient volume increased in two of the three (an indication of increasing financial risk). Total patient revenues for all HDs increased over the study period; however, the rate of increase slowed for all three after the Medicaid rollout date. All HDs experienced a decline in financial status between pre-post periods with the greatest decline observed in the HD that saw the greatest increase in indigent patient volume. ^ The pre-post case study format used and the lack of control study sites do not allow for assignment of causality. However, the results suggest possible adverse effects of Medicaid managed care and the need for a larger study, based on a stronger evaluation research design. ^

Estimates of hospital and physician costs of epilepsy in the United States for 1995 comparing the provider -based survey method and a patient -based medical charts and billing method

This investigation compares two different methodologies for calculating the national cost of epilepsy: provider-based survey method (PBSM) and the patient-based medical charts and billing method (PBMC&BM). The PBSM uses the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS), the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) and the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) as the sources of utilization. The PBMC&BM uses patient data, charts and billings, to determine utilization rates for specific components of hospital, physician and drug prescriptions. ^ The 1995 hospital and physician cost of epilepsy is estimated to be $722 million using the PBSM and $1,058 million using the PBMC&BM. The difference of $336 million results from $136 million difference in utilization and $200 million difference in unit cost. ^ Utilization. The utilization difference of $136 million is composed of an inpatient variation of $129 million, $100 million hospital and $29 million physician, and an ambulatory variation of $7 million. The $100 million hospital variance is attributed to inclusion of febrile seizures in the PBSM, $−79 million, and the exclusion of admissions attributed to epilepsy, $179 million. The former suggests that the diagnostic codes used in the NHDS may not properly match the current definition of epilepsy as used in the PBMC&BM. The latter suggests NHDS errors in the attribution of an admission to the principal diagnosis. ^ The $29 million variance in inpatient physician utilization is the result of different per-day-of-care physician visit rates, 1.3 for the PBMC&BM versus 1.0 for the PBSM. The absence of visit frequency measures in the NHDS affects the internal validity of the PBSM estimate and requires the investigator to make conservative assumptions. ^ The remaining ambulatory resource utilization variance is $7 million. Of this amount, $22 million is the result of an underestimate of ancillaries in the NHAMCS and NAMCS extrapolations using the patient visit weight. ^ Unit cost. The resource cost variation is $200 million, inpatient is $22 million and ambulatory is $178 million. The inpatient variation of $22 million is composed of $19 million in hospital per day rates, due to a higher cost per day in the PBMC&BM, and $3 million in physician visit rates, due to a higher cost per visit in the PBMC&BM. ^ The ambulatory cost variance is $178 million, composed of higher per-physician-visit costs of $97 million and higher per-ancillary costs of $81 million. Both are attributed to the PBMC&BM's precise identification of resource utilization that permits accurate valuation. ^ Conclusion. Both methods have specific limitations. The PBSM strengths are its sample designs that lead to nationally representative estimates and permit statistical point and confidence interval estimation for the nation for certain variables under investigation. However, the findings of this investigation suggest the internal validity of the estimates derived is questionable and important additional information required to precisely estimate the cost of an illness is absent. ^ The PBMC&BM is a superior method in identifying resources utilized in the physician encounter with the patient permitting more accurate valuation. However, the PBMC&BM does not have the statistical reliability of the PBSM; it relies on synthesized national prevalence estimates to extrapolate a national cost estimate. While precision is important, the ability to generalize to the nation may be limited due to the small number of patients that are followed. ^