英国医院在第一波和第二波冠状病毒大流行期间的表现分析。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Care Management Science Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-09 DOI:10.1007/s10729-023-09634-7
Timo Kuosmanen, Yong Tan, Sheng Dai
{"title":"英国医院在第一波和第二波冠状病毒大流行期间的表现分析。","authors":"Timo Kuosmanen,&nbsp;Yong Tan,&nbsp;Sheng Dai","doi":"10.1007/s10729-023-09634-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The coronavirus infection COVID-19 killed millions of people around the world in 2019-2022. Hospitals were in the forefront in the battle against the pandemic. This paper proposes a novel approach to assess the effectiveness of hospitals in saving lives. We empirically estimate the production function of COVID-19 deaths among hospital inpatients, applying Heckman's two-stage approach to correct for the bias caused by a large number of zero-valued observations. We subsequently assess performance of hospitals based on regression residuals, incorporating contextual variables to convex quantile regression. Data of 187 hospitals in England over a 35-week period from April to December 2020 is divided in two sub-periods to compare the structural differences between the first and second waves of the pandemic. The results indicate significant performance improvement during the first wave, however, learning by doing was offset by the new mutated virus straits during the second wave. While the elderly patients were at significantly higher risk during the first wave, their expected mortality rate did not significantly differ from that of the general population during the second wave. Our most important empirical finding concerns large and systematic performance differences between individual hospitals: larger units proved more effective in saving lives, and hospitals in London had a lower mortality rate than the national average.</p>","PeriodicalId":12903,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Management Science","volume":"26 3","pages":"447-460"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10166690/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance analysis of English hospitals during the first and second waves of the coronavirus pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Timo Kuosmanen,&nbsp;Yong Tan,&nbsp;Sheng Dai\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10729-023-09634-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The coronavirus infection COVID-19 killed millions of people around the world in 2019-2022. Hospitals were in the forefront in the battle against the pandemic. This paper proposes a novel approach to assess the effectiveness of hospitals in saving lives. We empirically estimate the production function of COVID-19 deaths among hospital inpatients, applying Heckman's two-stage approach to correct for the bias caused by a large number of zero-valued observations. We subsequently assess performance of hospitals based on regression residuals, incorporating contextual variables to convex quantile regression. Data of 187 hospitals in England over a 35-week period from April to December 2020 is divided in two sub-periods to compare the structural differences between the first and second waves of the pandemic. The results indicate significant performance improvement during the first wave, however, learning by doing was offset by the new mutated virus straits during the second wave. While the elderly patients were at significantly higher risk during the first wave, their expected mortality rate did not significantly differ from that of the general population during the second wave. Our most important empirical finding concerns large and systematic performance differences between individual hospitals: larger units proved more effective in saving lives, and hospitals in London had a lower mortality rate than the national average.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Care Management Science\",\"volume\":\"26 3\",\"pages\":\"447-460\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10166690/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Care Management Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10729-023-09634-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Management Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10729-023-09634-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2019-2022年,冠状病毒感染新冠肺炎导致全球数百万人死亡。医院在抗击疫情的斗争中处于最前线。本文提出了一种新的方法来评估医院在拯救生命方面的有效性。我们对住院患者中新冠肺炎死亡的生产函数进行了实证估计,应用Heckman的两阶段方法来纠正大量零值观察所引起的偏差。随后,我们基于回归残差评估医院的绩效,将上下文变量纳入凸分位数回归。在2020年4月至12月的35周时间里,英格兰187家医院的数据被分为两个子时段,以比较第一波和第二波疫情之间的结构差异。结果表明,在第一波疫情期间,表现有了显著改善,然而,在第二波疫情期间,新的变异病毒困境抵消了边做边学。虽然老年患者在第一波期间的风险明显更高,但他们的预期死亡率与第二波期间的普通人群没有显著差异。我们最重要的实证发现涉及各个医院之间巨大而系统的绩效差异:事实证明,更大的单位在拯救生命方面更有效,伦敦的医院死亡率低于全国平均水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Performance analysis of English hospitals during the first and second waves of the coronavirus pandemic.

The coronavirus infection COVID-19 killed millions of people around the world in 2019-2022. Hospitals were in the forefront in the battle against the pandemic. This paper proposes a novel approach to assess the effectiveness of hospitals in saving lives. We empirically estimate the production function of COVID-19 deaths among hospital inpatients, applying Heckman's two-stage approach to correct for the bias caused by a large number of zero-valued observations. We subsequently assess performance of hospitals based on regression residuals, incorporating contextual variables to convex quantile regression. Data of 187 hospitals in England over a 35-week period from April to December 2020 is divided in two sub-periods to compare the structural differences between the first and second waves of the pandemic. The results indicate significant performance improvement during the first wave, however, learning by doing was offset by the new mutated virus straits during the second wave. While the elderly patients were at significantly higher risk during the first wave, their expected mortality rate did not significantly differ from that of the general population during the second wave. Our most important empirical finding concerns large and systematic performance differences between individual hospitals: larger units proved more effective in saving lives, and hospitals in London had a lower mortality rate than the national average.

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
Health Care Management Science
Health Care Management Science HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: Health Care Management Science publishes papers dealing with health care delivery, health care management, and health care policy. Papers should have a decision focus and make use of quantitative methods including management science, operations research, analytics, machine learning, and other emerging areas. Articles must clearly articulate the relevance and the realized or potential impact of the work. Applied research will be considered and is of particular interest if there is evidence that it was implemented or informed a decision-making process. Papers describing routine applications of known methods are discouraged. Authors are encouraged to disclose all data and analyses thereof, and to provide computational code when appropriate. Editorial statements for the individual departments are provided below. Health Care Analytics Departmental Editors: Margrét Bjarnadóttir, University of Maryland Nan Kong, Purdue University With the explosion in computing power and available data, we have seen fast changes in the analytics applied in the healthcare space. The Health Care Analytics department welcomes papers applying a broad range of analytical approaches, including those rooted in machine learning, survival analysis, and complex event analysis, that allow healthcare professionals to find opportunities for improvement in health system management, patient engagement, spending, and diagnosis. We especially encourage papers that combine predictive and prescriptive analytics to improve decision making and health care outcomes. The contribution of papers can be across multiple dimensions including new methodology, novel modeling techniques and health care through real-world cohort studies. Papers that are methodologically focused need in addition to show practical relevance. Similarly papers that are application focused should clearly demonstrate improvements over the status quo and available approaches by applying rigorous analytics. Health Care Operations Management Departmental Editors: Nilay Tanik Argon, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Bob Batt, University of Wisconsin The department invites high-quality papers on the design, control, and analysis of operations at healthcare systems. We seek papers on classical operations management issues (such as scheduling, routing, queuing, transportation, patient flow, and quality) as well as non-traditional problems driven by everchanging healthcare practice. Empirical, experimental, and analytical (model based) methodologies are all welcome. Papers may draw theory from across disciplines, and should provide insight into improving operations from the perspective of patients, service providers, organizations (municipal/government/industry), and/or society. Health Care Management Science Practice Departmental Editor: Vikram Tiwari, Vanderbilt University Medical Center The department seeks research from academicians and practitioners that highlights Management Science based solutions directly relevant to the practice of healthcare. Relevance is judged by the impact on practice, as well as the degree to which researchers engaged with practitioners in understanding the problem context and in developing the solution. Validity, that is, the extent to which the results presented do or would apply in practice is a key evaluation criterion. In addition to meeting the journal’s standards of originality and substantial contribution to knowledge creation, research that can be replicated in other organizations is encouraged. Papers describing unsuccessful applied research projects may be considered if there are generalizable learning points addressing why the project was unsuccessful. Health Care Productivity Analysis Departmental Editor: Jonas Schreyögg, University of Hamburg The department invites papers with rigorous methods and significant impact for policy and practice. Papers typically apply theory and techniques to measuring productivity in health care organizations and systems. The journal welcomes state-of-the-art parametric as well as non-parametric techniques such as data envelopment analysis, stochastic frontier analysis or partial frontier analysis. The contribution of papers can be manifold including new methodology, novel combination of existing methods or application of existing methods to new contexts. Empirical papers should produce results generalizable beyond a selected set of health care organizations. All papers should include a section on implications for management or policy to enhance productivity. Public Health Policy and Medical Decision Making Departmental Editors: Ebru Bish, University of Alabama Julie L. Higle, University of Southern California The department invites high quality papers that use data-driven methods to address important problems that arise in public health policy and medical decision-making domains. We welcome submissions that develop and apply mathematical and computational models in support of data-driven and model-based analyses for these problems. The Public Health Policy and Medical Decision-Making Department is particularly interested in papers that: Study high-impact problems involving health policy, treatment planning and design, and clinical applications; Develop original data-driven models, including those that integrate disease modeling with screening and/or treatment guidelines; Use model-based analyses as decision making-tools to identify optimal solutions, insights, recommendations. Articles must clearly articulate the relevance of the work to decision and/or policy makers and the potential impact on patients and/or society. Papers will include articulated contributions within the methodological domain, which may include modeling, analytical, or computational methodologies. Emerging Topics Departmental Editor: Alec Morton, University of Strathclyde Emerging Topics will handle papers which use innovative quantitative methods to shed light on frontier issues in healthcare management and policy. Such papers may deal with analytic challenges arising from novel health technologies or new organizational forms. Papers falling under this department may also deal with the analysis of new forms of data which are increasingly captured as health systems become more and more digitized.
期刊最新文献
Assessing the performance of Portuguese public hospitals before and during COVID-19 outbreak, with optimistic and pessimistic benchmarking approaches. A reinforcement learning approach for the online dynamic home health care scheduling problem. Evaluating machine learning model bias and racial disparities in non-small cell lung cancer using SEER registry data. Forecasting to support EMS tactical planning: what is important and what is not. Health care management science for underserved populations.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1