Journal of Healthcare Management最新文献

Goal: To document shifts in rural hospital service line offerings between 2010 and 2021 and to assess the resulting impacts on hospital profitability.

Methods: We used annual Medicare cost report data for all rural hospitals that did not change payment classifications between 2010 and 2021. We documented changes in the percentages of hospitals offering each of the 37 inpatient or ancillary service lines included in the data. We then used panel event studies to assess effects on hospital operating margin for specific service lines that changed most prominently during this period.

Principal findings: Twelve service lines changed by more than 5% during our period of analysis. These are highlighted by hospitals adding rural health clinics (+32%) and CT scans (+20%) and removing delivery rooms (-21%) and skilled nursing facilities (-19%). Panel event studies demonstrated that the addition or subtraction of most services did not have statistically significant impacts on future hospital operating margins. Notable exceptions were the addition of rural health clinics and the removal of delivery services, both of which positively affected future operating margins. The addition of occupational therapy services had a positive effect on operating margin in the near term, but adding MRI services had a negative effect.

Practical applications: The finding that only a select few service line changes resulted in meaningful impacts to hospital operating margins suggests that hospital leaders should be wary of implementing such changes as a means of improving financial viability.

Goal: The U.S. hospital sector is experiencing record levels of integration, with more than half of U.S. physicians and nearly three quarters of all hospitals affiliated with one of slightly more than 630 health systems. However, there is growing evidence to suggest that health system integration is associated with more expensive and lower quality care. The goal of this research is to explore the associations between forms of health system integration and hospital patient experience scores.

Methods: A cross-section of data for the year 2019 was assembled and analyzed from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) patient experience survey. Data from the Compendium of US Health Systems, published by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and the American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey were used to obtain independent variables and hospital-level covariates. A series of multivariable regressions was used to explore the associations between forms of health system integration and hospital patient experience scores across three domains: overall impression of the hospital; experiences with staff; and the hospital environment. Forms of both horizontal integration (i.e., number of hospitals owned by hospital-based health systems) and vertical integration (i.e., physician-hospital integration, nursing home ownership, accountable care organization [ACO] participation, group purchasing, contract management, offering insurance products, and investor ownership) were explored.

Principal findings: Although horizontal integration was not associated with any meaningful differences in patient experience scores, health systems with physician-hospital integration were associated with overall impression scores that were 2 percentage points higher than systems without physician integration. Similarly, contract management and membership in a group purchasing organization were associated with overall impression and environment scores that were 2 to 3 percentage points higher than hospitals that did not engage in those forms of integration. By contrast, investor ownership was associated with a 5% lower score for overall patient experience compared with other forms of ownership.

Practical applications: The findings of this study suggest that hospitals in more vertically integrated systems may have higher patient experience scores than independent hospitals and those that belong exclusively to horizontally integrated systems. Thus, there are elements of vertical integration that could benefit patients and be worth pursuing. Conversely, higher degrees of horizontal integration in the form of multihospital ownership may not be of any benefit to patients and should be pursued with caution.

Summary: The influential report Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century established six core objectives to enhance healthcare quality. It highlighted the necessity for healthcare to encompass safety, effectiveness, a patient-centered approach, timeliness, efficiency, and equity. This essay focuses on one of these six core objectives: a patient-centered approach. Healthcare leaders actively seek solutions to improve and ensure the delivery of high-quality care. The imperative to provide quality healthcare underscores the need for artificial intelligence (AI) to become an essential component in a patient-centered approach rather than merely an optional advantage. Despite the expansion of AI, there is a lack of understanding of how AI can improve patient-centered care. This essay examines the fundamental aspects of patient-centered care, as outlined by the Picker Institute, while also exploring the prospective role of AI in advancing the core principles of patient-centered care and proposing frameworks for applying AI in healthcare.

Goal: We sought to build upon previous studies that have demonstrated how healthcare workers' ratings of their immediate supervisor's leadership capabilities relate to their well-being and job satisfaction.

Methods: In 2022, we analyzed cross-sectional data from 1,780 physicians and 39,896 allied health professionals (collected in 2017) and 729 residents (collected in 2019), as well as longitudinal data from 1,632 physicians (collected from 2015 to 2017), to identify a psychometrically strong, broadly applicable, actionable, and low-burden approach to assessing supervisor leadership capability to support healthcare worker well-being.

Principal findings: The magnitude of association between our 1-, 2-, 3-, and 9-item leadership indexes and burnout, and between our 1-, 2-, 3-, and 9-item leadership indexes and satisfaction with the organization were similar to each other in the cross-sectional and longitudinal cohorts and across diverse groups of healthcare workers, including physicians, residents, and allied health professionals. The likelihood ratio for a high leadership score increased with an increasing score for each leadership measure. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the 1-, 2-, and 3-item measures for a high leadership score was 0.9349, 0.9672, and 0.9819, respectively.

Practical applications: A single item assessing perceptions of leadership capability efficiently provides useful information about leadership qualities of healthcare workers' immediate supervisors. The inclusion of this item in healthcare worker surveys may be useful for evaluating interventions and galvanizing organizational action to support healthcare worker well-being.

Goal: The COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare market disruptors, and new digital healthcare technologies have made a substantial impact on the delivery of healthcare services, highlighting the critical roles of leaders in hospitals and health systems. This study sought to understand the evolving roles of CEOs, CIOs, and other executive leaders in the postpandemic era and highlight the adaptability and strategic vision of executives in shaping the future of healthcare delivery.

Methods: Between October 2022 and May 2023, 51 interviews were conducted with CEOs, CIOs, and other executives responsible for delivering technology solutions for 33 nonprofit health systems in the United States. They were asked to describe their backgrounds; how information solutions and technologies were viewed within their organizations' strategy, operations, and governance; and the key characteristics of executive leaders.

Principal findings: The study has found that effective CEOs have an authentic belief in technology's role in achieving their organization's mission and that contemporary CIOs are strategic executive partners who align strategy with culture to improve care. This study examines how healthcare systems are creating digitally savvy executive leadership teams that operate in a new, integrated model that unites previously siloed functions.

Practical applications: Some healthcare CIOs are unprepared for current and future business challenges, and some CEOs are unsure how to leverage digital technologies and C-suite expertise to transform their organizations. This research provides insights into how the nation's health systems are building and sustaining leadership teams capable of adapting to the healthcare environment and accelerating organizational transformation.

Goal: Value-based care is not simply a matter of cost, but also one of outcomes and harms per dollar spent. This definition encompasses three key components: healthcare delivery that is organized around patients' medical conditions, costs and outcomes that are actively and consistently measured, and information technology that enables the other two components. Our objective in this project was to implement and measure a systemwide high-value, evidence-based care initiative with five pillars of high-value practices.

Methods: We performed a quasi-experimental study from September 1, 2019, to August 31, 2022, of a new care program at the University of Texas Medical Branch. Drawing from the ABIM Foundation's Choosing Wisely Campaign, the program was based on five pillars-blood management and antimicrobial, laboratory, imaging, and opioid stewardship-with interdisciplinary teams led by institutional subject matter experts (i.e., administrative leaders) accompanied by nursing, information technology, pharmacy, and clinical and nonclinical personnel including faculty and trainees. Each pillar addressed two goals with targeted interventions to assess improvements during the first three fiscal years (FYs) of implementation. The targets were set at 10% improvement by the end of each FY. Monthly measurements were recorded for each FY.

Principal findings: We tracked performance toward 30 pillar goals and determined that the teams were successful in 50%, 50%, and 70% of their goals for FY 2020, 2021, and 2022, respectively. For example, in the antimicrobial stewardship FY 2021 pillar, one goal was to decrease meropenem days of therapy (DOT) by 10% (baseline was 45 DOT/1,000 patient days; the target was 40.5 DOT/1,000 patient days). We measured quarterly DOT/1,000 patient day rates of 32.02, 30.57, and 26.9, respectively, for a cumulative rate of 26.9. Critical interventions included engaging and empowering providers and service lines (including outliers whose performance was outside norms), educational conferences, and transparent data analyses.

Practical applications: We showed that a multidisciplinary approach to the implementation of an evidence-based, high-value care program through a partnership of engaged administrative leaders, providers, and trainees can result in sustainable and measurable high-value healthcare delivery. Specifically, structuring the program with pillars to address defined metrics resulted in progressive improvement in meeting value-based goals at the University of Texas Medical Branch. Also, challenges can be embraced as learning opportunities to inform value-based interventions that range from technological to educational tactics. The results at the University of Texas Medical Branch provide a benchmark for the implementation of a program that engages, empowers, and aligns innovative value-based care initiatives.

Summary: Physician burnout, a significant problem in modern healthcare, adversely affects healthcare professionals and their organizations. This essay explores the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to positively address this issue through its integration into the electronic health record and the automation of administrative tasks. Recent initiatives and research highlight the positive impact of AI assistants in alleviating physician burnout and suggest solutions to enhance physician well-being. By examining the causes and consequences of burnout, the promise of AI in healthcare, and its integration into electronic health record systems, this essay explores how AI can not only reduce physician burnout but also improve the efficiency of healthcare organizations. A roadmap provides a visualization of how AI could be integrated into electronic health records during the previsit, visit, and postvisit stages of a clinical encounter.