COVID-19 大流行对城市和农村医院盈利能力的影响。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Laura McFadyen, Susie Gurzenda, George Pink, Tyler Malone, Kristin Reiter
{"title":"COVID-19 大流行对城市和农村医院盈利能力的影响。","authors":"Laura McFadyen, Susie Gurzenda, George Pink, Tyler Malone, Kristin Reiter","doi":"10.1111/jrh.12864","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There are long-standing differences in profitability between rural and urban hospitals. Prior to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE), rural hospital profitability was decreasing, while urban hospital profitability was increasing. During the PHE, the Federal Government provided billions of dollars of support to hospitals. Given the prepandemic differences in trends in profitability, it is likely that the PHE funding had different effects on rural hospitals and urban hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study uses 2015-2023 Medicare cost report data from acute-care hospitals to assess the impact of COVID-19 PHE funding on hospital profitability. We employ descriptive Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests and an interrupted time series analysis to evaluate the effect of PHE funding on operating margins for a stratified sample of rural prospective payment system (PPS), urban PPS, and critical access hospitals (CAHs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found that the PHE funding was associated with significant increases in operating margins, with rural PPS hospitals experiencing similar increases compared to urban PPS hospitals, and CAHs surpassing both rural and urban PPS hospitals in their margin values. However, if PHE funding had not been provided, our evidence suggests operating margins for all hospitals in 2022-2023 would have been below prepandemic levels.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This preliminary analysis portrays the importance of the PHE government funding in supporting hospitals during the pandemic, and shows declining profitability trends without the funds. Rural PPS hospitals fare the worst suggesting continued need for financial support if the trend continues.</p>","PeriodicalId":50060,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rural Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on urban and rural hospital profitability.\",\"authors\":\"Laura McFadyen, Susie Gurzenda, George Pink, Tyler Malone, Kristin Reiter\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jrh.12864\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There are long-standing differences in profitability between rural and urban hospitals. Prior to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE), rural hospital profitability was decreasing, while urban hospital profitability was increasing. During the PHE, the Federal Government provided billions of dollars of support to hospitals. Given the prepandemic differences in trends in profitability, it is likely that the PHE funding had different effects on rural hospitals and urban hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study uses 2015-2023 Medicare cost report data from acute-care hospitals to assess the impact of COVID-19 PHE funding on hospital profitability. We employ descriptive Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests and an interrupted time series analysis to evaluate the effect of PHE funding on operating margins for a stratified sample of rural prospective payment system (PPS), urban PPS, and critical access hospitals (CAHs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found that the PHE funding was associated with significant increases in operating margins, with rural PPS hospitals experiencing similar increases compared to urban PPS hospitals, and CAHs surpassing both rural and urban PPS hospitals in their margin values. However, if PHE funding had not been provided, our evidence suggests operating margins for all hospitals in 2022-2023 would have been below prepandemic levels.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This preliminary analysis portrays the importance of the PHE government funding in supporting hospitals during the pandemic, and shows declining profitability trends without the funds. Rural PPS hospitals fare the worst suggesting continued need for financial support if the trend continues.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rural Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rural Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12864\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rural Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12864","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:长期以来,农村医院和城市医院的盈利能力一直存在差异。在 COVID-19 公共卫生紧急事件(PHE)之前,农村医院的盈利能力不断下降,而城市医院的盈利能力则不断上升。在公共卫生紧急状态期间,联邦政府向医院提供了数十亿美元的支持。鉴于疫前盈利趋势的差异,PHE 资金很可能对农村医院和城市医院产生了不同的影响:本研究使用 2015-2023 年急诊医院的医疗保险成本报告数据来评估 COVID-19 PHE 资金对医院盈利能力的影响。我们采用了描述性 Kruskal-Wallis 检验和卡方检验以及间断时间序列分析,以评估 PHE 资金对农村预期支付系统 (PPS)、城市预期支付系统 (PPS) 和关键通道医院 (CAH) 分层抽样的运营利润率的影响:结果:我们发现,公共卫生教育经费与运营利润率的大幅增长有关,农村预付费系统医院的增长幅度与城市预付费系统医院类似,而 CAH 的利润率值则超过了农村和城市预付费系统医院。然而,如果没有提供 PHE 资金,我们的证据表明,2022-2023 年所有医院的营业利润率都将低于流行前的水平:这项初步分析表明,在大流行期间,PHE 政府资金在支持医院方面发挥了重要作用,并显示出在没有这笔资金的情况下,医院的利润率呈下降趋势。农村 PPS 医院的情况最差,这表明如果这种趋势继续下去,将继续需要财政支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on urban and rural hospital profitability.

Introduction: There are long-standing differences in profitability between rural and urban hospitals. Prior to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE), rural hospital profitability was decreasing, while urban hospital profitability was increasing. During the PHE, the Federal Government provided billions of dollars of support to hospitals. Given the prepandemic differences in trends in profitability, it is likely that the PHE funding had different effects on rural hospitals and urban hospitals.

Methods: This study uses 2015-2023 Medicare cost report data from acute-care hospitals to assess the impact of COVID-19 PHE funding on hospital profitability. We employ descriptive Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests and an interrupted time series analysis to evaluate the effect of PHE funding on operating margins for a stratified sample of rural prospective payment system (PPS), urban PPS, and critical access hospitals (CAHs).

Results: We found that the PHE funding was associated with significant increases in operating margins, with rural PPS hospitals experiencing similar increases compared to urban PPS hospitals, and CAHs surpassing both rural and urban PPS hospitals in their margin values. However, if PHE funding had not been provided, our evidence suggests operating margins for all hospitals in 2022-2023 would have been below prepandemic levels.

Discussion: This preliminary analysis portrays the importance of the PHE government funding in supporting hospitals during the pandemic, and shows declining profitability trends without the funds. Rural PPS hospitals fare the worst suggesting continued need for financial support if the trend continues.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Rural Health
Journal of Rural Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
86
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Rural Health, a quarterly journal published by the NRHA, offers a variety of original research relevant and important to rural health. Some examples include evaluations, case studies, and analyses related to health status and behavior, as well as to health work force, policy and access issues. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies are welcome. Highest priority is given to manuscripts that reflect scholarly quality, demonstrate methodological rigor, and emphasize practical implications. The journal also publishes articles with an international rural health perspective, commentaries, book reviews and letters.
×
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