Relationship between hospital specialization and health outcomes in patients with nonsurgical spinal joint disease in South Korea: A nationwide evidence-based study using national health insurance data.

ABSTRACT: Previous studies on hospital specialization in spinal joint disease have been limited to patients requiring surgical treatment. The lack of similar research on the nonsurgical spinal joint disease in specialized hospitals provides limited information to hospital executives.To analyze the relationship between hospital specialization and health outcomes (length of stay and medical expenses) with a focus on nonsurgical spinal joint diseases.The data of 56,516 patients, which were obtained from the 2018 National Inpatient Sample, provided by the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, were utilized. The study focused on inpatients with nonsurgical spinal joint disease and used a generalized linear mixed model with specialization status as the independent variable. Hospital specialization was measured using the Inner Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (IHI). The IHI (value ≤1) was calculated as the proportion of hospital discharges accounted for by each service category out of the hospital's total discharges. Patient and hospital characteristics were the control variables, and the mean length of hospital stay and medical expenses were the dependent variables.The majority of the patients with the nonsurgical spinal joint disease were female. More than half of all patients were middle-aged (40-64 years old). The majority did not undergo surgery and had mild disease, with Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≤1. The mean inpatient expense was 1265.22 USD per patient, and the mean length of stay was 9.2 days. The specialization status of a hospital had a negative correlation with the length of stay, as well as with medical expenses. An increase in specialization status, that is, IHI, was associated with a decrease in medical expenses and the length of stay, after adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics.Hospital specialization had a positive effect on hospital efficiency. The results of this study could inform decision-making by hospital executives and specialty hospital-related medical policymakers.

Transplant programs, centers, and institutes: what does it all mean?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There are more than 250 transplant centers in the USA, but variation continues to exist in organizational structure for transplant multidisciplinary services. We reviewed the literature to explore the definitions for transplant organizational structures and address existing rationale for the development of the integrated transplant service line. RECENT FINDINGS: No standard definitions exist to differentiate the use of program, center, institute, or service line. A survey of 20 multiorgan transplant centers in the USA showed that most were named centers or institutes, but some were organized as departments and service lines. The prevailing themes were the perceived need for autonomy of the transplant entity, alignment among services and finances, and the alignment of authority with responsibility. In addition, perceived benefits included growth, alignment, efficiency, and resource allocation. SUMMARY: The multidisciplinary nature of transplantation generally has been fit into the matrix organizational model, although many hospitals today have departments, centers, institutes, and service lines structures. Integration has been viewed as beneficial by most transplant entities reviewed, with a sense that it is better adapted for the evolving healthcare climate.

Hospital characteristics and patient populations served by physician owned and non physician owned orthopedic specialty hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of physician owned specialty hospitals focusing on high margin procedures has generated significant controversy. Yet, it is unclear whether physician owned specialty hospitals differ significantly from non physician owned specialty hospitals and thus merit the additional scrutiny that has been proposed. Our objective was to assess whether physician owned specialty orthopedic hospitals and non physician owned specialty orthopedic hospitals differ with respect to hospital characteristics and patient populations served. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive study using Medicare data of beneficiaries who underwent total hip replacement (THR) (N = 10,478) and total knee replacement (TKR) (N = 15,312) in 29 physician owned and 8 non physician owned specialty orthopedic hospitals during 1999-2003. We compared hospital characteristics of physician owned and non physician owned specialty hospitals including procedural volumes of major joint replacements (THR and TKR), hospital teaching status, and for profit status. We then compared demographics and prevalence of common comorbid conditions for patients treated in physician owned and non physician owned specialty hospitals. Finally, we examined whether the socio-demographic characteristics of the neighborhoods where physician owned and non physician owned specialty hospitals differed, as measured by zip code level data. RESULTS: Physician owned specialty hospitals performed fewer major joint replacements on Medicare beneficiaries in 2003 than non physician owed specialty hospitals (64 vs. 678, P < .001), were less likely to be affiliated with a medical school (6% vs. 43%, P = .05), and were more likely to be for profit (94% vs. 28%, P = .001). Patients who underwent major joint replacement in physician owned specialty hospitals were less likely to be black than patients in non physician owned specialty hospitals (2.5% vs. 3.1% for THR, P = .15; 1.8% vs. 6.3% for TKR, P < .001), yet physician owned specialty hospitals were located in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of black residents (8.2% vs. 6.7%, P = .76). Patients in physician owned hospitals had lower rates of most common comorbid conditions including heart failure and obesity (P < .05 for both). CONCLUSION: Physician owned specialty orthopedic hospitals differ significantly from non physician owned specialty orthopedic hospitals and may warrant the additional scrutiny policy makers have proposed.