长期护理提供者的国家需求证明和暂停计划的趋势。

Charlene Harrington, Sharee Anzaldo, Anna Burdin, Martin Kitchener, Nancy Miller
{"title":"长期护理提供者的国家需求证明和暂停计划的趋势。","authors":"Charlene Harrington,&nbsp;Sharee Anzaldo,&nbsp;Anna Burdin,&nbsp;Martin Kitchener,&nbsp;Nancy Miller","doi":"10.1300/J045v19n02_02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study examined state policies for certificate of need or moratoria for new building, renovation, and remodeling of long-term care (LTC) providers, using a telephone survey of state officials in between 1990 and 2002. In 2002, the vast majority of states still continue to regulate the supply of nursing homes, hospital-based nursing homes, and facilities for the mentally retarded/developmentally disabled. Surprisingly, 18 percent of states regulate the supply of residential care facilities, 35 percent regulate home health agencies, and 37 percent regulate hospices. These state efforts to control supply are primarily based on cost containment strategies and assuring the appropriate distribution of LTC services. Where limits are placed on home and community service providers, however, access could be negatively impacted.</p>","PeriodicalId":73764,"journal":{"name":"Journal of health & social policy","volume":"19 2","pages":"31-58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1300/J045v19n02_02","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trends in state certificate of need and moratoria programs for long term care providers.\",\"authors\":\"Charlene Harrington,&nbsp;Sharee Anzaldo,&nbsp;Anna Burdin,&nbsp;Martin Kitchener,&nbsp;Nancy Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.1300/J045v19n02_02\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study examined state policies for certificate of need or moratoria for new building, renovation, and remodeling of long-term care (LTC) providers, using a telephone survey of state officials in between 1990 and 2002. In 2002, the vast majority of states still continue to regulate the supply of nursing homes, hospital-based nursing homes, and facilities for the mentally retarded/developmentally disabled. Surprisingly, 18 percent of states regulate the supply of residential care facilities, 35 percent regulate home health agencies, and 37 percent regulate hospices. These state efforts to control supply are primarily based on cost containment strategies and assuring the appropriate distribution of LTC services. Where limits are placed on home and community service providers, however, access could be negatively impacted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73764,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of health & social policy\",\"volume\":\"19 2\",\"pages\":\"31-58\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1300/J045v19n02_02\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of health & social policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1300/J045v19n02_02\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of health & social policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1300/J045v19n02_02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

本研究通过对1990年至2002年间的州官员进行电话调查,考察了各州对长期护理(LTC)提供者新建、翻新和改造的需要证明或暂停的政策。2002年,绝大多数州仍然继续管理养老院、医院疗养院和智力迟钝/发育障碍者设施的供应。令人惊讶的是,18%的州规范了住宿护理设施的供应,35%的州规范了家庭健康机构,37%的州规范了临终关怀医院。这些国家控制供应的努力主要基于成本控制战略和确保LTC服务的适当分配。但是,如果对家庭和社区服务提供者施加限制,则可能对获取服务产生负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Trends in state certificate of need and moratoria programs for long term care providers.

This study examined state policies for certificate of need or moratoria for new building, renovation, and remodeling of long-term care (LTC) providers, using a telephone survey of state officials in between 1990 and 2002. In 2002, the vast majority of states still continue to regulate the supply of nursing homes, hospital-based nursing homes, and facilities for the mentally retarded/developmentally disabled. Surprisingly, 18 percent of states regulate the supply of residential care facilities, 35 percent regulate home health agencies, and 37 percent regulate hospices. These state efforts to control supply are primarily based on cost containment strategies and assuring the appropriate distribution of LTC services. Where limits are placed on home and community service providers, however, access could be negatively impacted.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Public knowledge, attitudes, and behavior toward Kansas mandatory seatbelt use: implications for public health policy. Providing Behavioral Incentives for Improved Health in Aging and Medicare Cost Control Acknowledgments Grandfathers raising grandchildren:an exploration of african american kinship networks. TANF policy: past, present, and future directions.
×
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