Impact of Repeated Reimbursement Penalties on Hospital Total Quality Scores.

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Patient Safety Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-05 DOI:10.1097/PTS.0000000000001199
Alice Brewer, M Courtney Hughes, Kunal N Patel
{"title":"Impact of Repeated Reimbursement Penalties on Hospital Total Quality Scores.","authors":"Alice Brewer, M Courtney Hughes, Kunal N Patel","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000001199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The incidence of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) is a serious public health issue with implications ranging from patient morbidity and mortality to negative financial impacts on patients and health care systems. Despite substantial efforts to address and reduce HACs, research into the effect of quality improvement programs is inconclusive. This study seeks to better understand the relationship between repeated reimbursement penalties and improvement in HAC quality scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quantitative comparative analysis of U.S. health care data was conducted. Data on quality outcomes and hospital characteristics were sourced from the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program from fiscal years 2018 and 2019 and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Inpatient Prospective Payment System impact files, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 3123 U.S. hospitals were analyzed to compare differences between total HAC scores of hospitals with and without penalties in consecutive years. Hospitals with repeated penalties had significantly greater improvement in scores ( t497.262 = -13.00, P < 0.001), and the impact was greatest in small hospitals (<100 beds). Repeated penalties had a smaller impact on disproportionate share hospitals (Cohen d = 0.73). Among all hospitals, the effect of repeated penalties was large (Cohen d = 0.75).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study suggests that repeated penalties can improve quality scores in U.S. hospitals. However, the effect may be exaggerated for smaller hospitals and those that serve patient populations with a relatively higher socioeconomic status. The reason disproportionate share hospitals did not show as much improvement as nondisproportionate hospitals may be because hospitals serving vulnerable populations often have fewer resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":48901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient Safety","volume":" ","pages":"198-201"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000001199","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The incidence of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) is a serious public health issue with implications ranging from patient morbidity and mortality to negative financial impacts on patients and health care systems. Despite substantial efforts to address and reduce HACs, research into the effect of quality improvement programs is inconclusive. This study seeks to better understand the relationship between repeated reimbursement penalties and improvement in HAC quality scores.

Methods: A quantitative comparative analysis of U.S. health care data was conducted. Data on quality outcomes and hospital characteristics were sourced from the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program from fiscal years 2018 and 2019 and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Inpatient Prospective Payment System impact files, respectively.

Results: In total, 3123 U.S. hospitals were analyzed to compare differences between total HAC scores of hospitals with and without penalties in consecutive years. Hospitals with repeated penalties had significantly greater improvement in scores ( t497.262 = -13.00, P < 0.001), and the impact was greatest in small hospitals (<100 beds). Repeated penalties had a smaller impact on disproportionate share hospitals (Cohen d = 0.73). Among all hospitals, the effect of repeated penalties was large (Cohen d = 0.75).

Conclusions: This study suggests that repeated penalties can improve quality scores in U.S. hospitals. However, the effect may be exaggerated for smaller hospitals and those that serve patient populations with a relatively higher socioeconomic status. The reason disproportionate share hospitals did not show as much improvement as nondisproportionate hospitals may be because hospitals serving vulnerable populations often have fewer resources.

重复报销处罚对医院总体质量得分的影响。
目的:医院获得性病症(HACs)的发生率是一个严重的公共卫生问题,其影响范围包括患者的发病率和死亡率,以及对患者和医疗保健系统造成的负面经济影响。尽管在解决和减少 HACs 方面做出了巨大努力,但有关质量改进计划效果的研究仍无定论。本研究旨在更好地了解重复报销处罚与 HAC 质量评分改善之间的关系:方法:对美国医疗数据进行定量比较分析。有关质量结果和医院特征的数据分别来自 2018 和 2019 财年的医院获得性病症减少计划和美国医疗保险与医疗补助服务中心住院病人预付费系统影响文件:共对3123家美国医院进行了分析,以比较连续几年受到和未受到处罚的医院在HAC总分上的差异。结果:共对 3123 家美国医院进行了分析,比较了有处罚和没有处罚的医院在连续几年中 HAC 总分的差异,有重复处罚的医院得分提高幅度更大(t497.262 = -13.00,P < 0.001),而且对小型医院的影响最大(结论:重复处罚能提高医院的 HAC 总分:本研究表明,重复处罚可以提高美国医院的质量得分。然而,对于规模较小的医院和为社会经济地位相对较高的患者提供服务的医院来说,其效果可能会被夸大。不成比例医院之所以没有像非不成比例医院那样有明显改善,可能是因为为弱势群体服务的医院通常资源较少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Patient Safety
Journal of Patient Safety HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
13.60%
发文量
302
期刊介绍: Journal of Patient Safety (ISSN 1549-8417; online ISSN 1549-8425) is dedicated to presenting research advances and field applications in every area of patient safety. While Journal of Patient Safety has a research emphasis, it also publishes articles describing near-miss opportunities, system modifications that are barriers to error, and the impact of regulatory changes on healthcare delivery. This mix of research and real-world findings makes Journal of Patient Safety a valuable resource across the breadth of health professions and from bench to bedside.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信