Search

For millions of Americans living in vulnerable rural and urban communities, their hospital is an important, and often their only, source of health care. As transformation in the hospital and health care field continues, some communities may be at risk of losing access to health care services and the opportunities and resources they need to improve and maintain their health. Integrated, comprehensive strategies to reform health care delivery and payment, within which vulnerable communities can make individual choices based on their needs, support structures, and preferences, are needed.In this Invited Commentary, the authors outline characteristics and parameters of vulnerable communities as well as the essential health care services that hospitals should strive to maintain locally identified by the American Hospital Association Task Force on Ensuring Access in Vulnerable Communities. They also describe four of nine emerging strategies-recommended by the task force-to reform health care delivery and payment and allow hospitals to provide the essential health care services, along with implementation barriers and how to address them. While this Invited Commentary focuses on vulnerable communities, the four highlighted strategies (addressing the social determinants of health, adopting new and innovative virtual care strategies, designing global budgets, and using inpatient/outpatient transformation strategy), as well as the other five strategies, may have broader applicability for all communities.

Rethinking Community Benefit Programs - A New Vision for Hospital Investment in Community Health Over the past decade, hospitals have been tasked with a growing responsibility to address the social determinants of health. This requires (1) policy reforms that incentivize investments in community health, (2)hospital-community partnerships, and (3) a renewed focus on the "investment" in community investment. [Extracted from the article]

OBJECTIVES: Hospitals must strategically build organizational capacities to succeed in bundled payment arrangements. Given differences between Medicare and commercial arrangements, capacities may vary between hospitals in Medicare vs both Medicare and commercial bundled payment programs. This study compared organizational capacities between these 2 hospital groups. STUDY DESIGN: National survey of American Hospital Association (AHA) member hospitals with experience in bundled payment programs. METHODS: We analyzed data from October 31, 2017, to April 30, 2018, collected from AHA member hospitals with bundled payment experience in only Medicare (Medicareonly hospitals) or in both Medicare and commercial insurers (multipayer hospitals). Survey questions examined capacity in 4 areas: (1) physician performance feedback, (2) care management, (3) postacute care provider utilization, and (4) health information technology. RESULTS: Our sample included 114 hospitals reporting experience in Medicare or commercial bundled payment programs. Both Medicare-only and multipayer hospitals reported high organizational capacities in performance measurement of physician-level quality and cost feedback and in incorporation of health information technology. More multipayer hospitals reported high capacity for coordinating hospital to postacute care settings (88% vs 52%). Although nearly all hospitals in both groups reported formalized relationships with skilled nursing facilities (98%), fewer hospitals reported such relationships with long-term acute care hospitals (83%) and inpatient rehabilitation facilities (80%). CONCLUSIONS: Although they have similar capacity in a number of areas, Medicare-only and multipayer hospitals differed with respect to other aspects of organizational capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]