DOCSLIB.ORG

Will Not-For-Profit Providers Survive?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

\^ i \ w ,l»° HEALTH POLICY Market Transformation: Will Not-for-Profit Providers Survive? BY JANE HIEBERT-WHITE ospitals across the country are increas­ "Some Catholic hospitals will make it, but I think ingly joining integrated delivery sys- they should redirect their mission elsewhere. terns, and a number of those systems I hate to be crass, but I don't think a group of H 70-year-old nuns have the energy to compete in are organized on a for-profit basis, lie percentage of acute care hospitals in for- this market." Queally is a general partner of profit healthcare systems rose from 42.5 in 1992 Sprout Group, the venture capital affiliate of to 44.7 in 1994; meanwhile, the percentage of Donaldson, Lufkin & lenrette. hospitals in Catholic systems declined from 27.2 William Cox, executive vice president, Catholic in 1992 to 23.7 in 1994, according to the 1994 Health Association (CHA), responded by noting and 1995 Multi-Unit Providers Survey, spon­ that "investment bankers like Paul Queally have a sored by Modern Healthcare. In 1995 Columbia/ personal financial interest in seeing turnover [of Ms. Hubert-White HCA—the for-profit hospital system that most health facilities from not-for-profit to for-profit]. healthcare observers see as a catalyst for market There is tremendous personal financial reward change—showed phenomenal growth, acquiring is executive editor, involved, so their market analysis and observa­ 143 hospitals, thereby bringing its total to 338 tions must be examined critically." On the issue and its annual revenue to S4.6 billion.1 Health Affairs. of management, Cox said: Data from the American Hospital Association show that the nature of hospital ownership has Queally's denigration of Catholic hospitals' remained fairly stable over the past decade: Not- capacity to compete is completely gratu­ for-profit hospitals made up 58.4 percent of facil­ itous. Beyond his demeaning ad hominem ities in 1985 and 60.0 percent in 1993; investor- attack on the management skills of sisters, owned hospitals were 14.0 percent of the total in he provides no evidence that Catholic hos­ 1985 and 13.6 percent in 1993. Yet it is owner pitals are less well managed than Columbia/ ship of hospitals in systems—especially the newly HCA's. As CHA examines each market, \\ c emerging regional systems—that really bears find that, in general, Catholic hospitals and watching, since U.S. healthcare is moving toward health systems are strong competitors. Our system integration. challenge is to compete successfully, but in As market trends pressure the owners of some a way that doesn't undermine our identity not-for-profit hospitals to sell their facilities to— as Catholic organizations. or form joint ventures with—for-profit systems like Columbia/HCA, this has renewed an old This column delves into some of the issues debate among policy and system leaders concern­ raised by the not-for-profit versus for-profit ing the relative value of for-profit and not-for- healthcare debate and looks at policy analysts' profit healthcare delivery (see also Emily predictions for the future. Friedman's article on pp. 28-34). Perhaps no one has put the issue more baldly than venture capi­ FOR-PROFIT VERSUS NOT-FOR-PROFIT CARE talist Paul Queally. He said, at a November meet­ A recent national survey found that Americans' ing hosted by the Alpha Center in Washington, perceptions of for-profit and not-for-profit hospi­ DC, "In 10 years, I think Catholic charities will tals are mixed.2 For instance, Americans generally be out of the healthcare business. They lack the believe that for-profit hospitals are more efficient management and capital to effectively compete (59 percent for-profit versus 35 percent not-for- today and in the future." profit) and provide a higher qualify of care (57 Queally, a Catholic who sits on the board of a percent for-profit versus 34 percent not-for-prof­ Catholic hospital, elaborated in a conversation: it). Survey respondents also believe that for-profit 10 • MAY - JUNE 1996 HEALTH PROGRESS hospitals are somewhat more responsive to cus­ Columbia/HCA, has forced not-for-profit tomers (54 percent) than are not-for-profit hos­ providers to enhance their competitiveness. In a pitals (42 percent). study of 15 U.S. communities for the Robert But the survey also showed that not-for-profit Wood Johnson Foundation, healthcare research­ hospitals are viewed as being "more helpful to the er Kathryn Duke of the University of California- community" (65 percent not-for-profit versus 32 San Francisco found that "all of the study com­ percent for-profit). And Americans have the munities consistently cited Columbia/HCA's impression that not-for-profit hospitals cost them actual, expected, or rumored entry into their less (73 percent) compared with for-profit hospi­ community as a major influence on the actions of tals (22 percent). local hospitals.'" Indeed, a Catholic hospital sys­ When asked what the trend toward for-profit tem based in Cleveland has gone so far as to enter healthcare meant for the country, a majority (54 \n an era a joint venture with Columbia/HCA. The 1995 percent) perceived it as a "bad thing." On the agreement between the Sisters of Charity of St. other hand, a plurality (46 percent) said they where Augustine and the for-profit system was a first for trusted for-profit and not-for-profit hospitals Catholic providers. about equally to provide "high quality care at a healthcare Cox predicted that, given the competitive situ­ reasonable price" (26 percent said they trusted ation in some communities, "there will be other not-for-profits more, and 25 percent said they providers, Catholic hospitals that will sell out entirely to trusted for-profits more). Columbia/HCA or another for-profit chain. This random-sample survey of 1,007 adults However, from our perspective, there's a big dif­ nationwide, conducted by Louis Harris and industry ference between completely selling to a for-profit Associates for the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foun­ hospital chain and entering into a 50/50 deal and dation, was released at a December 1995 media leaders—even calling the outcome 'Catholic.'" He continued: briefing. Kaiser Executive Vice President Mark Smith, MD, noted that "on one hand, people Medicare As a rule, CHA is very doubtful that these want the healthcare system to be more busi­ kinds of [joint-venture] relationships [with nesslike and efficient, Yet, given the philanthrop­ officials—are for-profits] can, over the long run, truly ic, charitable history, especially of healthcare sustain and further the ministry of Catholic delivery, people are concerned about the business scrambling to healthcare. They can sustain hospitals, but ethic coming to dominate the healthcare system." not the mission of a Catholic institution. Although the survey's findings describe per­ court the It's not that we believe the investor-owned ceptions, not facts, they do indicate that not-for- institutions are in any way morally inferior. profit providers need to improve their image if We just believe that a shareholder-driven they expect Americans to support a continued consumer, healthcare organization is not the prefer­ not-for-profit healthcare delivery presence. able structure for nurturing and sustaining CHA's Cox agreed that, even though "for-prof­ not-for-profit the ministry of Catholic healthcare. its are not necessarily more efficient and it's about a draw with respect to quality, there is a hospitals will In defending Catholic hospitals' ability to perception problem for not-for-profits." Cox remain competitive, Cox added that "Columbia/ noted that this perception problem is especially need to reach HCA has attempted to engineer a number of serious in Congress and state legislatures, where [joint ventures with Catholic facilities] over a regulations and laws concerning tax-exempt sta­ long period of time and has succeeded only tus are debated. out more once." He acknowledged, however, that "we are Regarding responsiveness to the consumer, going to see a determined effort on the part of Cox conceded that Catholic hospitals "have not to the Columbia/HCA" to use that success to leverage done a good job of marketing ourselves to indi­ their way into additional 50/50 deals with viduals. We haven't had to in the past." How­ individual. Catholic healthcare facilities. ever, in an era where healthcare providers, indus­ Downsizing Cox noted analysts' prediction that, try leaders—even Medicare officials—are scram­ between now and 2000, up to a third of hospitals bling to understand and court the healthcare con­ in the United States will close because of the sumer, not-for-profit hospitals will need to reach spread of managed care. "This will affect Catholic out more to the individual. institutions as well," he said. Some analysts suggest that not-for-profit THE COMPETITIVENESS QUESTION providers are less able than for-profits to respond Columbia/HCA The expansion into many commu­ quickly to market pressure for downsizing, given nities of for-profit hospital chains, especially the not-for-profits' organizational structure and HEALTH PROGRESS MAY - JUNE 1996 • 11 HEALTH POLICY their hesitancy to close hospitals. Indeed, accord­ docs not go to shareholders—it is retained for the ing to Duke, "one Orange County |CA| hospital benefit of our members and the public in the CEO suggested that a philanthropic foundation form of facilities, technology, and lower premi­ could make a valuable contribution to local ums in the future."4 health care by reducing excess capacity through Lawrence added: "Health plans such as buying and then closing selected hospitals." Schaefrer's seem to view their primary activities as Cox countered that "Catholic hospitals tend to developing and marketing insurance products, close in the same proportion as the rest of the collecting premiums, and making the best eco­ universe and retain the same percentage pres­ nomic arrangements they can with providers.
Recommended publications
  • Hospital Networks: Perspective from Four Years of the Individual Market Exchanges Mckinsey Center for U.S

    Hospital Networks: Perspective from Four Years of the Individual Market Exchanges Mckinsey Center for U.S

    Hospital networks: Perspective from four years of the individual market exchanges McKinsey Center for U.S. Health System Reform May 2017 Any use of this material without specific permission of McKinsey & Company is strictly prohibited Key takeaways The proportion of narrowed The trend toward managed Narrowed networks continue to 1 networks continues to rise 2 plan design also continues. In 3 offer price advantages to (53% in 2017, up from 48% in the 2017 silver tier, more than consumers. In the 2017 silver 2014). In the 2017 individual 80% of narrowed network plans, tier, plans with broad networks market, both incumbent carriers and over half of the broad were priced ~18% higher than and new entrants carriers network plans, had managed narrowed network plans offered narrow networks designs predominantly Consumer choice is becoming Consumers who select narrowed In both 2014 and 2015 (most 4 more limited. In 2017, 29% of 5 networks in 2017 may have less 6 recent available data), narrowed QHP-eligible individuals had choice of specialty facilities network plans performed only narrowed network plans (e.g., children’s hospitals) but, in better financially, on average, available to them in the silver the aggregate, have access to than broad network plans did tier (up from 10% in 2014) hospitals with quality ratings similar to those in broad networks Definitions of "narrowed networks" and other specialized terms can be found in the glossary at the end of this document. McKinsey & Company 2 1 The proportion of narrowed networks continues to rise Network breadth by carrier status Ultra-narrow Narrow Tiered Broad N = number of networks1,2 Incumbents are using more narrowed networks New entrants2 primarily used narrowed More than half of networks are narrowed networks in 2017 1,883 1,703 37 2,410 2,782 2,524 1,740 19 21 24 20 18 18 21 25 21 23 25 28 28 4 38 6 5 5 4 4 0 52 47 53 54 53 47 38 2016 2017 2017 2014 2015 2016 2017 Carriers that remained in the market New entrants National view in both years 1 Networks were counted at a state rating area level.
  • CAREER GUIDE for RESIDENTS

    CAREER GUIDE for RESIDENTS

    Winter 2017 CAREER GUIDE for RESIDENTS Featuring: • Finding a job that fits • Fixing the system to fight burnout • Understanding nocturnists • A shift in hospital-physician affiliations • Taking communication skills seriously • Millennials, the same doctors in a changed environment • Negotiating an Employment Contract Create your legacy Hospitalists Legacy Health Portland, Oregon At Legacy Health, our legacy is doing what’s best for our patients, our people, our community and our world. Our fundamental responsibility is to improve the health of everyone and everything we touch–to create a legacy that truly lives on. Ours is a legacy of health and community. Of respect and responsibility. Of quality and innovation. It’s the legacy we create every day at Legacy Health. And, if you join our team, it’s yours. Located in the beautiful Pacific Northwest, Legacy is currently seeking experienced Hospitalists to join our dynamic and well established yet expanding Hospitalist Program. Enjoy unique staffing and flexible scheduling with easy access to a wide variety of specialists. You’ll have the opportunity to participate in inpatient care and teaching of medical residents and interns. Successful candidates will have the following education and experience: • Graduate of four-year U.S. Medical School or equivalent • Residency completed in IM or FP • Board Certified in IM or FP • Clinical experience in IM or FP • Board eligible or board certified in IM or FP The spectacular Columbia River Gorge and majestic Cascade Mountains surround Portland. The beautiful ocean beaches of the northwest and fantastic skiing at Mt. Hood are within a 90-minute drive. The temperate four-season climate, spectacular views and abundance of cultural and outdoor activities, along with five-star restaurants, sporting attractions, and outstanding schools, make Portland an ideal place to live.
  • Critical Information Could Your Patients Benefit

    Critical Information Could Your Patients Benefit

    To view this email as a web page, go here. September 30, 2018 Critical Information Everything you need to know Could your Patients Benefit from a Medicare Advantage Plan Powered by Hartford HealthCare? Hartford HealthCare and Tufts Health Plan have launched CarePartners of Connecticut, a new health insurance company that brings together the healthcare expertise of HHC with the insurance plan experience of Tufts Health Plan. CarePartners of Connecticut will offer Medicare Advantage plans to eligible beneficiaries, starting with the Open Enrollment period that begins Oct. 15. Recently, Dr. Jim Cardon explained the joint venture and the benefits for patients in an article in Network News. Read the Q&A here. Drs. Yu, Lawrence to Lead Tweeting for CME’s on Breast Cancer Discussion on Oct. 1 We’ve created a new way for you to earn Continuing Medical Education (CME) hours to keep abreast of the latest innovations in healthcare: Tweeting for CME’s. This unique partnership between the Hartford HealthCare Office of Continuing Education and the Planning & Marketing Department allows you to take part in a Twitter chat led by Hartford HealthCare experts and apply for CMEs as a result. "Each one­hour chat discusses a de­identified patient case and/or peer­reviewed journal article," said Hillary Landry, professional education manager with Hartford HealthCare's Office of Experience, Engagement & Organizational Development. "Participants wishing to earn CMEs would review the case or article in advance, then attend and participate in the chat by providing their insights using a specific Twitter hashtag: #CMEHHC." The next chat takes place tomorrow, Oct.
  • Graduate Medical Education at Westchester Medical Center About Our Residency and Fellowship Programs at Westchester Medical Center

    Graduate Medical Education at Westchester Medical Center About Our Residency and Fellowship Programs at Westchester Medical Center

    Graduate Medical Education at Westchester Medical Center About our Residency and Fellowship Programs at Westchester Medical Center Westchester Medical Center (WMC), as a regional healthcare referral center, provides high-quality, advanced tertiary and quaternary health services to the people of New York’s Hudson Valley. The Westchester Medical Center has a long-standing record as an academic medical center committed to education and research. Through its academic medical center activities, WMC provides cutting edge care to its patients, while preparing future generations of care givers in an interdisciplinary and interprofessional clinical learning environment. As an ACGME accredited Sponsoring Institution and in affiliation with New York Medical College as well as WMCHealth System member institutions, our residency and fellowship programs enjoy an integrated clinical and academic education platform that provides health care services for over three million adults and children in the Hudson Valley Region. Westchester Medical Center Specialty and Subspecialty training programs include 495 residents and fellows as well as 555 core clinical faculty who serve as the foundation of our clinical and scholastic enterprise. As a Sponsoring Institution as well as Participating Site, Westchester Medical Center supports the clinical learning environment of the following residency and fellowship experiences: Internal Medicine Residency Pediatric Residency Fellowships Fellowships Cardiovascular Disease Pediatric Gastroenterology Interventional Cardiology
  • Problems and Countermeasures in the Network Construction of Private Hospital Shuchen Liu Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China, 211189 Hunter2011@Foxmail.Com

    Problems and Countermeasures in the Network Construction of Private Hospital Shuchen Liu Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China, 211189 [email protected]

    International Conference on Economics, Social Science, Arts, Education and Management Engineering (ESSAEME 2015) Problems and Countermeasures in the Network Construction of Private Hospital Shuchen Liu Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China, 211189 [email protected] Keywords: Network construction, Civilian-run hospital private hospital, Problems , Countermeas- ures. Abstract. Network construction does not constitute a difficulty in public hospitals in China. But it is a headache for the civilian -run hospitals. Compared with the governmental hospital, the civilian- run hospital is in a disadvantageous position in finance, technology and talents. Due to the compre- hensive disadvantages, the network construction in civilian-run hospital also falls behind that of governmental hospital. This paper analyzes the problems of network construction in private hospital and puts forward the corresponding measures in order to provide some references for the related researches. Concept of Private Hospital Civilian-run hospitals are the medical institutions that are funded by social capital and approved by the administrative department of public health. The biggest characteristic of civilian-run hospital is self-supporting, self-management, self-development and self-perfection. This kind of hospital be- longs to private hospitals in foreign countries. At present, China's civilian-run hospitals are basically equivalent to private hospitals, so it is also known as private hospitals for civilian-run hospitals. China has made many policies to encourage and support social capital to enter the medical field, and promote the diversification of investment subjects in medical institutions, and provide the basic guarantee for the development of private hospitals at the policy level. But there are still many prob- lems in private hospitals, such as: the degree of social credibility needs to be further improved, the medical personnel should be strengthened, the regulations need to be perfected, and the fund is gen- erally insufficient.
  • Hospital Networking Guide a Practical Guide to Optimizing the Care Pathway for Hospitals by Developing an Ideal Network Infrastructure

    Hospital Networking Guide a Practical Guide to Optimizing the Care Pathway for Hospitals by Developing an Ideal Network Infrastructure

    Hospital Networking Guide A practical guide to optimizing the care pathway for hospitals by developing an ideal network infrastructure Brochure One private network for every department, delivered on a single network infrastructure. A hospital’s network is the foundation for the critical applications that run on it, where most of those applications are related to the hospitals core businesses. The return on the investments made in EMR (electronic medical records), PACS (picture archiving and communication system), clinical imaging systems and workstations on wheels, can only be truly realized if those assets are always available to the people in need in a reliable, secure and highly optimized way, at a ixed location, or while mobile. In addition, the hospital’s network is under constant pressure from new requirements driven by emerging technologies and digital social behavior. Clinicians are in need of access to information on their personal mobile devices, such as smart phones D D D and tablets, while patients and visitors demand Internet connectivity for social networking and entertainment. IoT devices and sensors are creating “smart” hospitals that heavily affect clinician and patient experiences in the hospital as well. Many hospitals use a separate network infrastructure for every department as a C C C C way to provide security and performance. Separate networks may exist for bio- medical devices such as infusion pumps and meters. There may be one for security supporting video cameras and secure access to the buildings. Another one may exist for facilities which would include laundry, kitchens and heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems (HVAC). Plus another for patient entertainment, such as TV and Internet access, with yet one more for clinicians and their communication and computing systems.
  • Critical Access Hospital Medicare Survey Preparation

    Critical Access Hospital Medicare Survey Preparation

    Critical Access Hospital Medicare Survey Preparation The following tips and tools are provided to assist critical access hospital staff preparing for the next Medicare survey. This document has three sections: Survey Preparation Recommendations, Conditions of Participation Guidance, and Additional Resources. Survey Preparation Recommendations Create a Survey Team within your hospital. The team should be responsible for gathering necessary and preferred documentation (and keeping it current), working with department managers and other staff in ensuring everyone understands their role in the survey process, and checking for compliance on a regular basis. Survey documents. Have a folder ready with the following documents. Be sure to keep these documents updated. o Map/floor plan o Organizational chart o List of staff and hours of operation o List of services including those that are contracted o Quality Assurance/Quality Improvement Plans o Infection Control Plan o Network agreement o Copy of CLIA or other certifications and the most recent survey documentation Policy documentation and processes. The Conditions of Participation (see Guidance, below) frequently refer to the process taken to review (and revise, as necessary) all patient care policies. Although each department should be responsible for the review of their policies, it is important to have a written explanation of how the group described in TAG C272 is involved in this process. Both a description of the process and evidence of this group’s involvement must be readily available for a surveyor’s review. - 1 – June 2008 Rev. Oct 2008 Environmental Walk-through. Part of the survey process includes a walk-through of the facility.
  • Ehospitalists: IMPLEMENTING a NEW FRONTIER

    Ehospitalists: IMPLEMENTING a NEW FRONTIER

    eHOSPITALISTS: IMPLEMENTING A NEW FRONTIER Business Plan Submission Amanda Trask, MBA, MHA, FACHE, SFHM, FACMPE July 30, 3019 This paper is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement of the Fellowship in the American College of Medical Practice Executives. Table of Contents PROJECT SUMMARY.................................................................................................... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 4 The Company ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Mission Statement ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Market Opportunity ................................................................................................................................. 4 Management and Key Personnel ............................................................................................................. 5 Competitors ............................................................................................................................................... 5 The Business’ Competitive Advantages .................................................................................................. 5 Financial Information ..............................................................................................................................
  • Hospital Networks: Configurations on the Exchanges and Their Impact On

    Hospital Networks: Configurations on the Exchanges and Their Impact On

    Hospital networks: Configurations on the exchanges and their impact on premiums The configuration of hospital networks is changing on the new public health exchanges and, in many cases, having a direct impact on premium levels. We are observing a phenomenon not dissimilar to that noted in the emerging private defined contribution exchanges: specifically, the “segmentation and valuing” of choice in the form of a proliferation of products with varying breadths of hospital networks. Across the markets we analyzed, there is a greater breadth of network options available on the individual exchanges compared to the 2013 individual market, with nearly every rating area offering consumers products with networks spanning from very narrow to broad. This trend is consistent with what we see in most well-functioning consumer markets ranging from cell phone plans to automobiles – a variety of choices comprising different value propositions at different price points. The growing prevalence of products utilizing narrow and “ultra”-narrow hospital networks is evident,1 and the motivation is bi-lateral. Hospitals in some cases have removed themselves from network consideration, believing the value of their services exceeds the amount carriers are willing to offer in terms of reimbursement. Carriers are adapting to affordability imperatives by actively excluding some higher cost hospitals while collaborating more closely with those willing to accept lower reimbursement rates. This latter group of hospitals is perhaps motivated by the potential to increase volume in what has been a flat to modest growth environment. These are both legitimate strategic postures and only time will resolve the prudence of either or both.
  • Digital Age Networking for Healthcare

    Digital Age Networking for Healthcare

    Digital Age Networking for Healthcare Brochure Digital revolution in healthcare Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise Digital Age Networking helps hospitals and clinics connect are also major concerns. For healthcare providers to best transition to new technology, patients, staff, and the healthcare ecosystem, by delivering network technologies that they need assurances that the network will be specifically designed to meet industry work across, and beyond the facilities. It optimizes the patient care pathway and needs. Some considerations include: improves staff efficiency through innovative network services such as wayfinding • Connected medical devices: A hospital network must be able to identify, securely and medical asset tracking, which run on top of a reliable, secure and high- onboard, and connect a variety of medical devices (fixed and mobile) to their performance Wi-Fi infrastructure. ALE technologies also ensure secure network respective applications. setup, unified access and policy management, automated user and device onboarding, while granting optimal Quality of Service (QoS) for users and medical IoT devices. • Need for high resolution imaging for diagnosis: 4k imaging and high resolution images are increasingly being used by doctors to improve diagnosis. The network The healthcare digital revolution differs from other industries. Healthcare providers must be able to transfer large image files without network delays or without have a variety of unique needs when it comes to the network and IT infrastructure. affecting the performance of the network. For this reason, it has always been difficult for hospitals, clinics, and assisted living • Mobile patient information: Patient information such as EHR/EMR, imaging, and facilities (aged care versus healthcare), to adopt modern technology standards.
  • Hospital Network Competition and Adverse Selection: Evidence from the Massachusetts Health Insurance Exchange

    Hospital Network Competition and Adverse Selection: Evidence from the Massachusetts Health Insurance Exchange

    Hospital Network Competition and Adverse Selection: Evidence from the Massachusetts Health Insurance Exchange Mark Shepard* Harvard Kennedy School and NBER February 29, 2016 Abstract I study the role of adverse selection when health insurers compete on an increasingly important benefit: coverage of the most prestigious (and expensive) “star” hospitals. Using data from Massachusetts’ pioneer insurance exchange, I show evidence of substantial adverse selection through a channel theoretically distinct from standard selection on medical risk. Plans that cover star hospitals attract consumers with high costs because when sick, they tend to use the expensive star providers. This selection persists even with risk adjustment, which does not offset higher costs driven by hospital choices rather than medical risk. I show evidence of adverse selection through this mechanism using consumer choices across plans that differ in star hospital coverage and using switching choices after a plan drops the star hospitals from network. I then estimate a structural model of insurer competition to study the welfare and policy implications of selection. I find that adverse selection creates a strong incentive not to cover the star hospitals. Simple modifications to risk adjustment can preserve coverage, but I find that they do little to improve net welfare because of offsetting costs of greater use of the star hospitals. These results illustrate the challenge of addressing adverse selection in settings where it is linked to moral hazard. * Post-Doctoral Fellow in Aging and Health Care at NBER (2015-16) and Assistant Professor of Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School (2016+). Email: [email protected]. I thank my Ph.D.
  • Hospitals' Use of Electronic Health Records Data, 2015-2017

    Hospitals' Use of Electronic Health Records Data, 2015-2017

    ONC Data Brief ■ No. 46■ April 2019 Hospitals’ Use of Electronic Health Records Data, 2015-2017 Sonal Parasrampuria, MPH and Jawanna Henry, MPH The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act of 2009 helped to advance the adoption and meaningful use of electronic health records (EHRs). Today, more than 95 percent of hospitals possess an EHR (1). With widespread adoption of EHRs, policy is now shifting towards the use of EHR data. EHR data can improve patient care by giving providers access to evidence based tools that assist with decision making and facilitating clinical practice by automating and streamlining the provider workflow (2). This brief uses data from the American Hospital Association Information Technology Survey to describe trends in the use of EHR data among non-federal acute care hospitals from 2015 to 2017. We defined use of EHR data as a set of ten measures that describe hospital processes for leveraging data within their EHR to inform clinical practice (see appendix for survey details). The data brief also presents variation in the use of this data by hospital characteristics and over time. HIGHLIGHTS As of 2017, 94 percent of hospitals used their EHR data to perform hospital processes that inform clinical practice. EHR data is most commonly used by hospitals to support quality improvement (82 percent), monitor patient safety (81 percent), and measure organization performance (77 percent). Hospital characteristics significantly impact the use of EHR data - small, rural, critical access, state/local government, and non-teaching hospitals had the lowest rates of using their EHR data.