医院 Magnet® 状态与绩效薪酬惩罚的关联。

IF 2.1 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice Pub Date : 2021-11-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-22 DOI:10.1177/15271544211053854
Andrew M Dierkes, Kathryn Riman, Marguerite Daus, Hayley D Germack, Karen B Lasater
{"title":"医院 Magnet® 状态与绩效薪酬惩罚的关联。","authors":"Andrew M Dierkes, Kathryn Riman, Marguerite Daus, Hayley D Germack, Karen B Lasater","doi":"10.1177/15271544211053854","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Pay-for-Performance (P4P) programs aim to improve hospital care through financial incentives for care quality and patient outcomes. Magnet<sup>®</sup> recognition-a potential pathway for improving nurse work environments-is associated with better patient outcomes and P4P program scores, but whether these indicators of higher quality are substantial enough to avoid penalties and thereby impact hospital reimbursements is unknown. This cross-sectional study used a national sample of 2,860 hospitals to examine the relationship between hospital Magnet<sup>®</sup> status and P4P penalties under P4P programs: Hospital Readmission Reduction Program, Hospital-Acquired Conditions (HAC) Reduction Program, Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program. Magnet<sup>®</sup> hospitals were matched 1:1 with non-Magnet hospitals accounting for 13 organizational characteristics including hospital size and location. Post-match logistic regression models were used to compute a hospital's odds of penalties. In a national sample of hospitals, 77% of hospitals experienced P4P penalties. Magnet<sup>®</sup> hospitals were less likely to be penalized in the VBP program compared to their matched non-Magnet counterparts (40% vs. 48%). Magnet<sup>®</sup> status was associated with 30% lower odds of VBP penalties relative to non-Magnet hospitals. Lower P4P program penalties is one benefit associated with achieving Magnet<sup>®</sup> status or otherwise maintaining high-quality nurse work environments.</p>","PeriodicalId":53177,"journal":{"name":"Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice","volume":"22 4","pages":"245-252"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9394674/pdf/nihms-1828865.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Association of Hospital Magnet<sup>®</sup> Status and Pay-for-Performance Penalties.\",\"authors\":\"Andrew M Dierkes, Kathryn Riman, Marguerite Daus, Hayley D Germack, Karen B Lasater\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15271544211053854\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Pay-for-Performance (P4P) programs aim to improve hospital care through financial incentives for care quality and patient outcomes. Magnet<sup>®</sup> recognition-a potential pathway for improving nurse work environments-is associated with better patient outcomes and P4P program scores, but whether these indicators of higher quality are substantial enough to avoid penalties and thereby impact hospital reimbursements is unknown. This cross-sectional study used a national sample of 2,860 hospitals to examine the relationship between hospital Magnet<sup>®</sup> status and P4P penalties under P4P programs: Hospital Readmission Reduction Program, Hospital-Acquired Conditions (HAC) Reduction Program, Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program. Magnet<sup>®</sup> hospitals were matched 1:1 with non-Magnet hospitals accounting for 13 organizational characteristics including hospital size and location. Post-match logistic regression models were used to compute a hospital's odds of penalties. In a national sample of hospitals, 77% of hospitals experienced P4P penalties. Magnet<sup>®</sup> hospitals were less likely to be penalized in the VBP program compared to their matched non-Magnet counterparts (40% vs. 48%). Magnet<sup>®</sup> status was associated with 30% lower odds of VBP penalties relative to non-Magnet hospitals. Lower P4P program penalties is one benefit associated with achieving Magnet<sup>®</sup> status or otherwise maintaining high-quality nurse work environments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53177,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice\",\"volume\":\"22 4\",\"pages\":\"245-252\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9394674/pdf/nihms-1828865.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15271544211053854\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/10/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15271544211053854","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心的绩效付费(P4P)计划旨在通过对护理质量和患者疗效的经济激励来改善医院护理。磁石®认可--一种改善护士工作环境的潜在途径--与更好的患者治疗效果和 P4P 计划得分相关,但这些更高质量的指标是否足以避免处罚,从而影响医院的报销,目前还不得而知。这项横断面研究使用了全国 2,860 家医院的样本,以考察医院的 Magnet® 状态与 P4P 计划下的 P4P 处罚之间的关系:医院再入院率降低计划、医院获得性病症(HAC)降低计划、医院价值采购(VBP)计划。根据医院规模和地点等 13 项组织特征,将 Magnet® 医院与非 Magnet 医院进行 1:1 匹配。匹配后的逻辑回归模型用于计算医院受罚的几率。在全国医院样本中,77% 的医院受到了 P4P 处罚。与匹配的非磁性®医院相比,磁性®医院在 VBP 计划中受到处罚的可能性较低(40% 对 48%)。与非磁性医院相比,磁性医院受到 VBP 惩罚的几率要低 30%。较低的 P4P 计划处罚是获得 Magnet® 地位或以其他方式保持高质量护士工作环境的一个好处。
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
The Association of Hospital Magnet® Status and Pay-for-Performance Penalties.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Pay-for-Performance (P4P) programs aim to improve hospital care through financial incentives for care quality and patient outcomes. Magnet® recognition-a potential pathway for improving nurse work environments-is associated with better patient outcomes and P4P program scores, but whether these indicators of higher quality are substantial enough to avoid penalties and thereby impact hospital reimbursements is unknown. This cross-sectional study used a national sample of 2,860 hospitals to examine the relationship between hospital Magnet® status and P4P penalties under P4P programs: Hospital Readmission Reduction Program, Hospital-Acquired Conditions (HAC) Reduction Program, Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program. Magnet® hospitals were matched 1:1 with non-Magnet hospitals accounting for 13 organizational characteristics including hospital size and location. Post-match logistic regression models were used to compute a hospital's odds of penalties. In a national sample of hospitals, 77% of hospitals experienced P4P penalties. Magnet® hospitals were less likely to be penalized in the VBP program compared to their matched non-Magnet counterparts (40% vs. 48%). Magnet® status was associated with 30% lower odds of VBP penalties relative to non-Magnet hospitals. Lower P4P program penalties is one benefit associated with achieving Magnet® status or otherwise maintaining high-quality nurse work environments.

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
Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice
Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice Nursing-Leadership and Management
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Policy, Politics & Nursing Practice is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal that explores the multiple relationships between nursing and health policy. It serves as a major source of data-based study, policy analysis and discussion on timely, relevant policy issues for nurses in a broad variety of roles and settings, and for others outside of nursing who are interested in nursing-related policy issues.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the Motivations, Challenges, and Integration of Internationally Educated Healthcare Workers in the UK: A Scoping Review. Analysis of Ohio Nurses' Voting Behaviors 2020-2023. The "Right Kinds of Nurses": Centering LPNs in the Nursing Labor Force. Racism and Redlining in the History of Psychiatric Policy and Practice in Atlanta: Implications for Nursing. Xylazine in the Unregulated Drug Market: An Integrative Review of Its Prevalence, Health Impacts, and Detection and Intervention Challenges in the United States.
×
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