Search

BACKGROUND: Health sciences libraries are being closed or are under threat of closure, but little is published that looks at context and causes or alternative library service delivery models such as affiliations or consolidations. There is also very little research about the effect of these changes on health care provider satisfaction, patient care, or hospital quality indicators. Preventing library closures is not always possible, but understanding some of the circumstances leading to the decision and implementation of a closure or consolidation could inform best practice management. CASE PRESENTATIONS: At a recent Medical Library Association joint chapter meeting, a panel of six librarians presented their cases of navigating a library closure or reorganization. Background information was given to highlight reasons that the decisions to reorganize or close were made. Following the case presentations, participants took part in discussion with audience members. Cases and discussion points were recorded for further research, publication, and advocacy. CONCLUSIONS: Several points from the cases are highlighted in the discussion section of the paper. An accurate reporting of US health sciences libraries and librarian staffing is needed. More needs to be written about new library service models and best practices for centralizing and maintaining library services. After a consolidation, remaining librarians will be expected to manage the effects of staff loss and site closures and so should be involved in planning and implementing these decisions. It remains to be determined how hospitals with librarians compare in patient care and other quality indicators against hospitals without librarians.

ObjectiveTo determine the association of the Martin Luther King Jr Hospital (MLK) closure on the distribution of admissions on adjacent trauma centres, and injury mortality rates in these centres and within the county.DesignObservational, retrospective study.SettingNon-public patient-level data from the state of California were obtained for all trauma patients from 1999 to 2009. Geospatial analysis was used to visualise the redistribution of trauma patients to other hospitals after MLK closed. Variance of observed to expected injury mortality using multivariate logistic regression was estimated for the study period.ParticipantsA total of 37 131 trauma patients were admitted to the five major south Los Angeles trauma centres from the MLK service area between 1999 and 2009.Main outcome measures(1) Number and type of trauma admissions to trauma centres in closest proximity to MLK; (2) inhospital injury mortality of trauma patients after the trauma centre closure.ResultsDuring and after the MLK closure, trauma admissions increased at three of the four nearby hospitals, particularly admissions for gunshot wounds (GSWs). This redistribution of patient load was accompanied by a dramatic change in the payer mix for surrounding hospitals; one hospital's share of uninsured more than tripled from 12.9% in 1999 to 44.6% by 2009. Overall trauma mortality did not significantly change, but GSW mortality steadily and significantly increased after the closure from 5.0% in 2007 to 7.5% in 2009.ConclusionsThough local hospitals experienced a dramatic increase in trauma patient volume, overall mortality for trauma patients did not significantly change after MLK closed.

ObjectiveTo determine the association of the Martin Luther King Jr Hospital (MLK) closure on the distribution of admissions on adjacent trauma centres, and injury mortality rates in these centres and within the county.DesignObservational, retrospective study.SettingNon-public patient-level data from the state of California were obtained for all trauma patients from 1999 to 2009. Geospatial analysis was used to visualise the redistribution of trauma patients to other hospitals after MLK closed. Variance of observed to expected injury mortality using multivariate logistic regression was estimated for the study period.ParticipantsA total of 37 131 trauma patients were admitted to the five major south Los Angeles trauma centres from the MLK service area between 1999 and 2009.Main outcome measures(1) Number and type of trauma admissions to trauma centres in closest proximity to MLK; (2) inhospital injury mortality of trauma patients after the trauma centre closure.ResultsDuring and after the MLK closure, trauma admissions increased at three of the four nearby hospitals, particularly admissions for gunshot wounds (GSWs). This redistribution of patient load was accompanied by a dramatic change in the payer mix for surrounding hospitals; one hospital's share of uninsured more than tripled from 12.9% in 1999 to 44.6% by 2009. Overall trauma mortality did not significantly change, but GSW mortality steadily and significantly increased after the closure from 5.0% in 2007 to 7.5% in 2009.ConclusionsThough local hospitals experienced a dramatic increase in trauma patient volume, overall mortality for trauma patients did not significantly change after MLK closed.

Between 1996 and 2009 the annual number of emergency department (ED) visits in the United States increased by 51 percent while the number of EDs nationwide decreased by 6 percent, which placed unprecedented strain on the nation's EDs. To investigate the effects of an ED's closing on surrounding communities, we identified all ED closures in California during the period 1999-2010 and examined their association with inpatient mortality rates at nearby hospitals. We found that one-quarter of hospital admissions in this period occurred near an ED closure and that these admissions had 5 percent higher odds of inpatient mortality than admissions not occurring near a closure. This association persisted whether we considered ED closures as affecting all future nearby admissions or only those occurring in the subsequent two years. These results suggest that ED closures have ripple effects on patient outcomes that should be considered when health systems and policy makers decide how to regulate ED closures.

The literature on social capital and civic engagement as they relate to health and health services outcomes is nuanced and sometimes conflicting, and has been a topic of much investigation in the pages of Social Science and Medicine. Ko et al. (2014) add to this research by considering two health services outcomes: the closure and privatization of public hospitals. We draw from education research on the role of community/civic engagement in public school closures to identify areas for future research to better understand these nuances. Qualitative research on school closures suggest that there are both well-managed and poorly managed closure decisions, and there are diverse community groups with interests in the decision who can interact with each other in nuanced ways. Furthermore, across stakeholder groups, there is not always agreement as to if closure would help or harm their students' education. We encourage health and health services researchers to glean insights from education research and other disciplines disparate but related and relevant to public health when developing research questions and considering alternative methodologies.

The literature on social capital and civic engagement as they relate to health and health services outcomes is nuanced and sometimes conflicting, and has been a topic of much investigation in the pages of Social Science and Medicine. Ko et al. (2014) add to this research by considering two health services outcomes: the closure and privatization of public hospitals. We draw from education research on the role of community/civic engagement in public school closures to identify areas for future research to better understand these nuances. Qualitative research on school closures suggest that there are both well-managed and poorly managed closure decisions, and there are diverse community groups with interests in the decision who can interact with each other in nuanced ways. Furthermore, across stakeholder groups, there is not always agreement as to if closure would help or harm their students' education. We encourage health and health services researchers to glean insights from education research and other disciplines disparate but related and relevant to public health when developing research questions and considering alternative methodologies.

Between 1996 and 2009 the annual number of emergency department (ED) visits in the United States increased by 51 percent while the number of EDs nationwide decreased by 6 percent, which placed unprecedented strain on the nation's EDs. To investigate the effects of an ED's closing on surrounding communities, we identified all ED closures in California during the period 1999-2010 and examined their association with inpatient mortality rates at nearby hospitals. We found that one-quarter of hospital admissions in this period occurred near an ED closure and that these admissions had 5 percent higher odds of inpatient mortality than admissions not occurring near a closure. This association persisted whether we considered ED closures as affecting all future nearby admissions or only those occurring in the subsequent two years. These results suggest that ED closures have ripple effects on patient outcomes that should be considered when health systems and policy makers decide how to regulate ED closures.

BACKGROUND: Trauma centers are an effective but costly element of the US health care infrastructure. Some Level I and II trauma centers regularly incur financial losses when these high fixed costs are coupled with high burdens of uncompensated care for disproportionately young and uninsured trauma patients. As a result, they are at risk of reducing their services or closing. The impact of these closures on patient outcomes, however, has not been previously assessed. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of all adult patient visits for injuries at Level I and II, nonfederal trauma centers in California between 1999 and 2009. Within this population, we compared the in-hospital mortality of patients whose drive time to their nearest trauma center increased as the result of a nearby closure with those whose drive time did not increase using a multivariate logit-linked generalized linear model. Our sensitivity analysis tested whether this effect was limited to a 2-year period following a closure. RESULTS: The odds of inpatient mortality increased by 21% (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.40) among trauma patients who experienced an increased drive time to their nearest trauma center as a result of a closure. The sensitivity analyses showed an even larger effect in the 2 years immediately following a closure, during which patients with increased drive time had 29% higher odds of inpatient death (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.51). CONCLUSION: Our results show a strong association between closure of trauma centers in California and increased mortality for patients with injuries who have to travel further for definitive trauma care. These adverse impacts were intensified within 2 years of a closure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and epidemiologic, level III.

BackgroundTrauma centers are an effective but costly element of the US health care infrastructure. Some Level I and II trauma centers regularly incur financial losses when these high fixed costs are coupled with high burdens of uncompensated care for disproportionately young and uninsured trauma patients. As a result, they are at risk of reducing their services or closing. The impact of these closures on patient outcomes, however, has not been previously assessed.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of all adult patient visits for injuries at Level I and II, nonfederal trauma centers in California between 1999 and 2009. Within this population, we compared the in-hospital mortality of patients whose drive time to their nearest trauma center increased as the result of a nearby closure with those whose drive time did not increase using a multivariate logit-linked generalized linear model. Our sensitivity analysis tested whether this effect was limited to a 2-year period following a closure.ResultsThe odds of inpatient mortality increased by 21% (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.40) among trauma patients who experienced an increased drive time to their nearest trauma center as a result of a closure. The sensitivity analyses showed an even larger effect in the 2 years immediately following a closure, during which patients with increased drive time had 29% higher odds of inpatient death (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.51).ConclusionOur results show a strong association between closure of trauma centers in California and increased mortality for patients with injuries who have to travel further for definitive trauma care. These adverse impacts were intensified within 2 years of a closure.Level of evidencePrognostic and epidemiologic, level III.

BackgroundTrauma centers are an effective but costly element of the US health care infrastructure. Some Level I and II trauma centers regularly incur financial losses when these high fixed costs are coupled with high burdens of uncompensated care for disproportionately young and uninsured trauma patients. As a result, they are at risk of reducing their services or closing. The impact of these closures on patient outcomes, however, has not been previously assessed.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of all adult patient visits for injuries at Level I and II, nonfederal trauma centers in California between 1999 and 2009. Within this population, we compared the in-hospital mortality of patients whose drive time to their nearest trauma center increased as the result of a nearby closure with those whose drive time did not increase using a multivariate logit-linked generalized linear model. Our sensitivity analysis tested whether this effect was limited to a 2-year period following a closure.ResultsThe odds of inpatient mortality increased by 21% (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.40) among trauma patients who experienced an increased drive time to their nearest trauma center as a result of a closure. The sensitivity analyses showed an even larger effect in the 2 years immediately following a closure, during which patients with increased drive time had 29% higher odds of inpatient death (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.51).ConclusionOur results show a strong association between closure of trauma centers in California and increased mortality for patients with injuries who have to travel further for definitive trauma care. These adverse impacts were intensified within 2 years of a closure.Level of evidencePrognostic and epidemiologic, level III.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We seek to determine whether patients living in areas affected by emergency department (ED) closure, with subsequent increased distance to the nearest ED, have a higher risk of inpatient death from time-sensitive conditions. METHODS: Using the California Office of Statewide Health and Planning Development database, we performed a nonconcurrent cohort study of hospital admissions in California between 1999 and 2009 for patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction, stroke, sepsis and asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We used generalized linear mixed-effects models comparing adjusted inpatient mortality for patients experiencing increased distance to the nearest ED versus no change in distance. RESULTS: Of 785,385 patient admissions, 67,577 (8.6%) experienced an increase in distance to ED care because of an ED closure. The median change for patients experiencing an increase in distance to the nearest ED was only 0.8 miles, with a range of 0.1 to 33.4 miles. Patients with an increase did not have a significantly higher mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.09). In subgroups, we also observed no statistically significant differences in adjusted mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction, stroke, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and sepsis. We did not observe any significant variations in mortality for time-sensitive conditions in sensitivity analyses that incorporated a lag effect of time after change in distance, allowance for a larger affected population, or removal of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction from the acute myocardial infarction subgroup. CONCLUSION: In this large population-based sample, less than 10% of the patients experienced an increase in distance to the nearest ED, and of that group, the majority had less than a 1-mile increase. These small increased distances to the nearest ED were not associated with higher inpatient mortality among time-sensitive conditions.

Study objectiveWe seek to determine whether patients living in areas affected by emergency department (ED) closure, with subsequent increased distance to the nearest ED, have a higher risk of inpatient death from time-sensitive conditions.MethodsUsing the California Office of Statewide Health and Planning Development database, we performed a nonconcurrent cohort study of hospital admissions in California between 1999 and 2009 for patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction, stroke, sepsis and asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We used generalized linear mixed-effects models comparing adjusted inpatient mortality for patients experiencing increased distance to the nearest ED versus no change in distance.ResultsOf 785,385 patient admissions, 67,577 (8.6%) experienced an increase in distance to ED care because of an ED closure. The median change for patients experiencing an increase in distance to the nearest ED was only 0.8 miles, with a range of 0.1 to 33.4 miles. Patients with an increase did not have a significantly higher mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.09). In subgroups, we also observed no statistically significant differences in adjusted mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction, stroke, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and sepsis. We did not observe any significant variations in mortality for time-sensitive conditions in sensitivity analyses that incorporated a lag effect of time after change in distance, allowance for a larger affected population, or removal of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction from the acute myocardial infarction subgroup.ConclusionIn this large population-based sample, less than 10% of the patients experienced an increase in distance to the nearest ED, and of that group, the majority had less than a 1-mile increase. These small increased distances to the nearest ED were not associated with higher inpatient mortality among time-sensitive conditions.

Study objectiveWe seek to determine whether patients living in areas affected by emergency department (ED) closure, with subsequent increased distance to the nearest ED, have a higher risk of inpatient death from time-sensitive conditions.MethodsUsing the California Office of Statewide Health and Planning Development database, we performed a nonconcurrent cohort study of hospital admissions in California between 1999 and 2009 for patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction, stroke, sepsis and asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We used generalized linear mixed-effects models comparing adjusted inpatient mortality for patients experiencing increased distance to the nearest ED versus no change in distance.ResultsOf 785,385 patient admissions, 67,577 (8.6%) experienced an increase in distance to ED care because of an ED closure. The median change for patients experiencing an increase in distance to the nearest ED was only 0.8 miles, with a range of 0.1 to 33.4 miles. Patients with an increase did not have a significantly higher mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.09). In subgroups, we also observed no statistically significant differences in adjusted mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction, stroke, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and sepsis. We did not observe any significant variations in mortality for time-sensitive conditions in sensitivity analyses that incorporated a lag effect of time after change in distance, allowance for a larger affected population, or removal of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction from the acute myocardial infarction subgroup.ConclusionIn this large population-based sample, less than 10% of the patients experienced an increase in distance to the nearest ED, and of that group, the majority had less than a 1-mile increase. These small increased distances to the nearest ED were not associated with higher inpatient mortality among time-sensitive conditions.

"Presenteeism" occurs when an employee goes to work despite a medical illness that will prevent him or her from fully functioning at work. This problem has been well studied in the business and social science literature, and carries increased importance in the health care setting due to the risk of infectious disease transmission in vulnerable patient populations. In this manuscript, we discuss an outbreak of viral gastroenteritis in a long-term care facility and the role presenteeism played in disease transmission and extension of the outbreak. We use existing literature to point out the hazards of presenteeism in the health care sector. We will also discuss factors that may be involved in the decision to work while ill and propose policy changes that may reduce the incidence of presenteeism in health care organizations.

"Presenteeism" occurs when an employee goes to work despite a medical illness that will prevent him or her from fully functioning at work. This problem has been well studied in the business and social science literature, and carries increased importance in the health care setting due to the risk of infectious disease transmission in vulnerable patient populations. In this manuscript, we discuss an outbreak of viral gastroenteritis in a long-term care facility and the role presenteeism played in disease transmission and extension of the outbreak. We use existing literature to point out the hazards of presenteeism in the health care sector. We will also discuss factors that may be involved in the decision to work while ill and propose policy changes that may reduce the incidence of presenteeism in health care organizations.

To measure the impact of health maintenance organizations (HMOs) on hospital capacity, utilization, and expenditures between 1983 and 1993.Multivariate regression analysis.Private nonprofit and for-profit hospitals in California with 25 or more beds.Patient discharge abstract data were used to measure growth of HMO penetration of local hospital markets.None.Hospital closures, changes in bed capacity, changes in acute care admissions and length of stay, psychiatric inpatient days, subacute inpatient days, inpatient and outpatient surgical procedures, ambulatory patient visits, and hospital expenditures.Between 1983 and 1993 hospital expenditures grew 44% less rapidly in markets with high HMO penetration than in markets with low HMO penetration. Of this, 28% was due to reductions in the volume and mix of services, 6% was due to reductions in bed capacity, and 10% was due to changes in the intensity of services provided. Health maintenance organizations accelerated the substitution of outpatient for inpatient surgery, the shift from acute to subacute inpatient days, and the reduction of psychiatric hospitalization.Managed care is shifting the acute hospital from the center toward the periphery of the health care system.