需要证明书政策与安宁疗护质量结果之间的关联。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-31 DOI:10.1177/10499091231180613
Arlen G Gaines, John G Cagle
{"title":"需要证明书政策与安宁疗护质量结果之间的关联。","authors":"Arlen G Gaines, John G Cagle","doi":"10.1177/10499091231180613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Certificate of need (CON) laws are state-based regulations requiring approval of new healthcare entities and capital expenditures. Varying by state, these regulations impact hospices in 14 states and DC, with several states re-examining provisions.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This cross-sectional study examined the association of CON status on hospice quality outcomes using the hospice item set metric (HIS).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Data from the February 2022 Medicare Hospice Provider and General Information reports of 4870 US hospices were used to compare group means of the 8 HIS measures across CON status. Multiple regression analysis was used to predict HIS outcomes by CON status while controlling for ownership and size.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Approximately 86% of hospices are in states without a hospice CON provision. The unadjusted mean HIS scores for all measures were higher in CON states (M range 94.40-99.59) than Non-CON (M range 90.50-99.53) with significant differences in all except treatment preferences. In the adjusted model, linear regression analyses showed hospice CON states had significantly higher HIS ratings than those from Non-CON states for beliefs and values addressed (β = .05, <i>P</i> = .009), pain assessment (β = .05, <i>P</i> = .009), dyspnea treatment (β = .08, <i>P</i> < .001) and the composite measure (β = .09, <i>P</i> < .001). Treatment preferences, pain screening, dyspnea screening, and opioid bowel treatment were not statistically significant (<i>P</i> > .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study suggests that CON regulations may have a modest, but beneficial impact on hospice-reported quality outcomes, particularly for small and medium-sized hospices. Further research is needed to explore other factors that contribute to HIS outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":50810,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"471-478"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Associations Between Certificate of Need Policies and Hospice Quality Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Arlen G Gaines, John G Cagle\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10499091231180613\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Certificate of need (CON) laws are state-based regulations requiring approval of new healthcare entities and capital expenditures. Varying by state, these regulations impact hospices in 14 states and DC, with several states re-examining provisions.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This cross-sectional study examined the association of CON status on hospice quality outcomes using the hospice item set metric (HIS).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Data from the February 2022 Medicare Hospice Provider and General Information reports of 4870 US hospices were used to compare group means of the 8 HIS measures across CON status. Multiple regression analysis was used to predict HIS outcomes by CON status while controlling for ownership and size.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Approximately 86% of hospices are in states without a hospice CON provision. The unadjusted mean HIS scores for all measures were higher in CON states (M range 94.40-99.59) than Non-CON (M range 90.50-99.53) with significant differences in all except treatment preferences. In the adjusted model, linear regression analyses showed hospice CON states had significantly higher HIS ratings than those from Non-CON states for beliefs and values addressed (β = .05, <i>P</i> = .009), pain assessment (β = .05, <i>P</i> = .009), dyspnea treatment (β = .08, <i>P</i> < .001) and the composite measure (β = .09, <i>P</i> < .001). Treatment preferences, pain screening, dyspnea screening, and opioid bowel treatment were not statistically significant (<i>P</i> > .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study suggests that CON regulations may have a modest, but beneficial impact on hospice-reported quality outcomes, particularly for small and medium-sized hospices. Further research is needed to explore other factors that contribute to HIS outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"471-478\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091231180613\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091231180613","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:需求证明(CON)法是以州为基础的法规,要求批准新的医疗实体和资本支出。这些法规因州而异,对 14 个州和华盛顿特区的安宁疗护机构产生影响,其中有几个州正在重新审查相关规定。目的:本横断面研究使用安宁疗护项目组指标(HIS),考察了 CON 状态与安宁疗护质量结果之间的关联:设计:使用来自 2022 年 2 月 4870 家美国安宁疗护机构的医疗保险安宁疗护提供者和一般信息报告中的数据,比较不同 CON 状态下 8 项 HIS 指标的组平均值。在控制所有权和规模的同时,使用多元回归分析预测不同CON状态下的HIS结果:结果:大约86%的临终关怀机构所在的州没有临终关怀CON条款。有安宁疗护协议州的所有衡量指标的未调整平均 HIS 分数(中值范围 94.40-99.59)均高于无安宁疗护协议州(中值范围 90.50-99.53),除治疗偏好外,其他指标均存在显著差异。在调整后的模型中,线性回归分析表明,安宁疗护CON州在以下方面的HIS评分明显高于非CON州:信念和价值观(β = .05,P = .009)、疼痛评估(β = .05,P = .009)、呼吸困难治疗(β = .08,P < .001)和综合测量(β = .09,P < .001)。治疗偏好、疼痛筛查、呼吸困难筛查和阿片类药物肠道治疗均无统计学意义(P > .05):该研究表明,CON 法规可能会对安宁疗护机构报告的质量结果产生适度但有益的影响,尤其是对中小型安宁疗护机构而言。还需要进一步的研究来探索影响安宁疗护结果的其他因素。
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
Associations Between Certificate of Need Policies and Hospice Quality Outcomes.

Background: Certificate of need (CON) laws are state-based regulations requiring approval of new healthcare entities and capital expenditures. Varying by state, these regulations impact hospices in 14 states and DC, with several states re-examining provisions.

Aim: This cross-sectional study examined the association of CON status on hospice quality outcomes using the hospice item set metric (HIS).

Design: Data from the February 2022 Medicare Hospice Provider and General Information reports of 4870 US hospices were used to compare group means of the 8 HIS measures across CON status. Multiple regression analysis was used to predict HIS outcomes by CON status while controlling for ownership and size.

Results: Approximately 86% of hospices are in states without a hospice CON provision. The unadjusted mean HIS scores for all measures were higher in CON states (M range 94.40-99.59) than Non-CON (M range 90.50-99.53) with significant differences in all except treatment preferences. In the adjusted model, linear regression analyses showed hospice CON states had significantly higher HIS ratings than those from Non-CON states for beliefs and values addressed (β = .05, P = .009), pain assessment (β = .05, P = .009), dyspnea treatment (β = .08, P < .001) and the composite measure (β = .09, P < .001). Treatment preferences, pain screening, dyspnea screening, and opioid bowel treatment were not statistically significant (P > .05).

Conclusion: The study suggests that CON regulations may have a modest, but beneficial impact on hospice-reported quality outcomes, particularly for small and medium-sized hospices. Further research is needed to explore other factors that contribute to HIS outcomes.

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
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
169
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine (AJHPM) is a peer-reviewed journal, published eight times a year. In 30 years of publication, AJHPM has highlighted the interdisciplinary team approach to hospice and palliative medicine as related to the care of the patient and family. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
期刊最新文献
Exploring the Perceptions of Families and Nurses After Signing a Do-Not-Resuscitate Order for Patients in Respiratory Care Wards Differences in Timely Goals of Care Discussions in Nursing Homes Among Black Residents A Way Forward for Comprehensive Cancer Caregiver Support Development of a Hospice Perceptions Instrument for Diverse Patients and Families: Establishing Content and Face Validity Antibiotics at End of Life: Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going? A Narrative Review
×
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