Boamah, Sheila A.

SUMMARY Goal While studies have examined quality and health outcomes related to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS’s) Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) Program, a significant gap exists in the literature regarding the relationship between pay-for-performance initiatives and hospital financial performance in the program’s Efficiency and Cost Reduction domain. This study examined the association between hospitals’ cost inefficiency and participation in the HVBP Program by estimating the probability and magnitude of improvement or achievement in the program’s Efficiency and Cost Reduction domain. Methods The 2014–2019 Efficiency and Cost Reduction domain data were obtained from CMS and merged with the American Hospital Association’s Annual Survey Database. We conducted a zero-inflated negative binomial regression to account for the excessive number of zeros in the data. Principal Findings The negative binomial component of the model assessed the magnitude of the impact on the Efficiency and Cost Reduction improvement from each covariate, while the zero-inflated component assessed the odds of being in the “certain-zero” group, meaning no chance to improve or achieve. Hospital ownership, location, size, safety-net status, percentage of Medicare patients, and the number of registered nurses per bed were statistically significant. Additionally, the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index and teaching status significantly influenced efficiency performance. Practical Applications Changes in hospital performance in this domain exist and have evolved. Hospitals might be at a disadvantage with this performance measure because of their inherent organizational structure. The HVBP Program may not provide clear enough direction or actionable incentive to address the needs of stakeholders influenced primarily by measures of Medicare spending per beneficiary. This study’s findings hold practical value for policymakers, healthcare administrators, and researchers. Policymakers can use this information to tailor future pay-for-performance programs and effectively allocate resources. Healthcare administrators can identify areas for improvement and benchmark their performance against similar institutions. Researchers can explore the program’s long-term sustainability and investigate cost drivers within different hospital groups. By understanding the link between hospital characteristics and cost reduction, all stakeholders can contribute to a more efficient healthcare system.

Abstract Aims To assess the impact of community‐level characteristics on the role of magnet designation in relation to hospital value‐based purchasing quality scores, as health disparities associated with geographical location could confound hospitals' ability to meet outcome metrics. Design This cross‐sectional study was carried out between October 2021 and March 2022 using data from 2016 to 2021. Methods Propensity score analysis was used to match hospital and community‐level characteristics, implementing nearest neighbour matching to adjust for pre‐treatment differences between magnet and non‐magnet hospitals to account for multi‐level differences. Secondary data were obtained from all operational acute‐care facilities in the United States that participated in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' hospital value‐based purchasing (HVBP) program. Dependent variables were the four value‐based purchasing domains that comprise the Total Performance Score (TPS; Clinical Care, Person and Community Engagement, Safety, and Efficiency and Cost Reduction). Results Magnet hospitals had increased odds for better scores in the HVBP domains of Clinical Care and Person and Community Engagement, and decreased odds for having better Safety. However, no statistically significant difference was found for the Efficiency domain or the TPS. Conclusion Measuring performance equitably across organizations of various sizes serving diverse communities remains a key factor in ensuring distributive justice. Analysing the TPS components can identify complex influences of community‐level characteristics not evident at the composite level. More research is needed where community and nurse‐level factors may indirectly affect patient safety. Impact This study's findings on the role of community contexts can inform policymakers designing value‐based care programs and healthcare management administrators deliberating on magnet certification investments across diverse community settings. No patient or public contribution For this study of US hospitals' organizational performance, we did not engage members of the patient population nor the general public. However, the multi‐disciplinary research team does include diverse perspectives.

Objective A key quality indicator in any health system is its ability to reduce morbidity and mortality. In recent years, healthcare organizations in the United States have been held to stricter measures of accountability to provide safe, quality care. This study aimed to explore the contextual factors driving racial disparities in hospital-acquired conditions incident rates among Medicare recipients in Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals. Methods A cross-sectional observational study was performed using data from Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program. Performance from 1823 hospitals were used to examine the association between Magnet recognition and community’s racial and ethnic differences in hospital performance on the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program. The unit of analysis was the hospital level. A propensity score matching approach was used to take into account differences in baseline characteristics when comparing Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals. The outcome measures were risk-standardized hospital performance on the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program domains and overall performance. Results Study findings show that Magnet hospitals had decreased methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) rate (β = −0.22; 95% confidence interval, −0.36 to −0.08) compared with non-Magnet hospitals. No other statistical difference was identified. Conclusions Results from this study show community’s racial and ethnic differences in hospital-acquired conditions occurrence differ between Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals for MRSA, indicating its association with nursing practice. However, because this improvement is limited to only MRSA, there are likely opportunities for Magnet hospitals to continue process improvements focused on additional Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program measures.

Abstract Aims To determine if there is an association between better County Health Rankings and the increased odds of a hospital gaining Magnet designation in subsequent years (2014–2019) compared with counties with lower rankings. Background The Magnet hospital model is recognized to have a great effect on nurses, patients and organizational outcomes. Although Magnet hospital designation is a well‐established structural marker for nursing excellence, the effect of County Health Rankings and subsequent hospital achievement of Magnet status is unknown. Design A descriptive, cross‐sectional quantitative approach was adopted for this study. Methods Data were derived from 2010 to 2019 U.S. County Health Rankings, American Hospital Association, and American Nursing Credentialing Center databases. Logistic regression models were utilized to determine associations between county rankings for health behaviours, clinical care, social and economic factors, physical environment and counties with a new Magnet hospital after 2014. Results Counties with the worst rankings for clinical care and socio‐economic status had reduced odds of obtaining a Magnet hospital designation compared with best‐ranking counties. While middle‐ranking counties for the physical environment ranking had increased odds of having Magnet designation compared with best‐ranking counties. Additionally, having an increased percent of government non‐federal hospital or a higher percentage of critical access hospitals in the county reduced the odds of having a Magnet‐designated facility after 2014. Conclusion The findings underscore the important associations between Magnet‐designated facilities’ location and the health of its surrounding counties. This study is the first to examine the relationship between County Health Rankings and a hospital's likelihood of obtaining Magnet status and points to the need for future research to explore outcomes of care previously identified as improved in Magnet‐designated hospitals. Implications Recognizing the benefits of Magnet facilities, it is important for health care leaders and policy makers to seek opportunities to promote centres of excellence in higher need communities through policy and financial intervention.