Search

An analysis of trends in hospital use and capacity by ownership status and community poverty levels for large urban and suburban areas was undertaken to examine changes that may have important implications for the future of the hospital safety net in large metropolitan areas. Using data on general acute care hospitals located in the 100 largest cities and their suburbs for the years 1996, 1999, and 2002, we examined a number of measures of use and capacity, including staffed beds, admissions, outpatient and emergency department visits, trauma centers, and positron emission tomography scanners. Over the 6-year period, the number of for-profit, nonprofit, and public hospitals declined in both cities and suburbs, with public hospitals showing the largest percentage of decreases. By 2002, for-profit hospitals were responsible for more Medicaid admissions than public hospitals for the 100 largest cities combined. Public hospitals, however, maintained the longest Medicaid average length of stay. The proportion of urban hospital resources located in high poverty cities was slightly higher than the proportion of urban population living in high poverty cities. However, the results demonstrate for the first time, a highly disproportionate share of hospital resources and use among suburbs with a low poverty rate compared to suburbs with a high poverty rate. High poverty communities represented the greatest proportion of suburban population in 2000 but had the smallest proportion of hospital use and specialty care capacity, whereas the opposite was true of low poverty suburbs. The results raise questions about the effects of the expanding role of private hospitals as safety net providers, and have implications for poor residents in high poverty suburban areas, and for urban safety net hospitals that care for poor suburban residents in surrounding communities.

A new "boutique" chain is roaring out the gate with $1 billion to spend and plans for 10 hospitals. University General Hospital Systems, which aspires to offer the feel of a luxury hotel in its facilities, is wading into the thick of some of the most controversial issues in healthcare. All but one of its hospitals are planned for states without CON laws, according to W.J. "Bill" Burk, left.

We examine the evolving structure of the US hospital industry since 1970, focusing on how ownership form influences entry and exit behavior. We develop theoretical predictions based on the model of Lakdawalla and Philipson, in which for-profit and not-for-profit hospitals differ regarding their objectives and costs of capital. The model predicts for-profits would be quicker to enter and exit than not-for-profits in response to changing market conditions. We test this hypothesis using data for all US hospitals from 1984 to 2000. Examining annual and regional entry and exit rates, for-profit hospitals consistently have higher entry and exit rates than not-for-profits. Econometric modeling of entry and exit rates yields similar patterns. Estimates of an ordered probit model of entry indicate that entry is more responsive to demand changes for for-profit than not-for-profit hospitals. Estimates of a discrete hazard model for exit similarly indicate that negative demand shifts increase the probability of exit more for for-profits than not-for-profits. Finally, membership in a hospital chain significantly decreases the probability of exit for for-profits, but not not-for-profits., (Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

The percentage of investor-owned hospitals is at an all-time high, helped in part by sales of not-for-profit facilities. Hillcrest HealthCare System's board decided to sell 10 of its hospitals after taking a hard look at its finances. "We weren't concerned about the short term, but the long term," Don Lorack, left, said.

This DataWatch presents information on the extent, geographic distribution, and other issues related to hospital conversions during the 1980s and 1990s. On average, 1 percent of hospitals convert each year. Many states experienced hospital conversions, but much of the conversion activity was concentrated in California, Florida, Georgia, and Texas. While conversions of not-for-profit hospitals to for-profit status have received significant attention, conversions of public hospitals and for-profit hospitals raise complex policy issues, as well.

It's becoming showdown time in more markets as not-for-profit hospitals face new competitors for rehabilitation patients--the large, investor-owned rehab chains. Not-for-profits argue the chains are adding unneeded beds and that their admission decisions focus only on the insured. The chains defend their record of indigent care and say they're not in the habit of building unnecessary facilities.

Increasing emphasis is being placed on the role of the private sector in health in South Africa. This article uses the private hospital (PH) industry in the greater Cape Town area as a case study. The development and structure of the industry is described. Access to PHs is found to depend largely on membership of a medical aid fund. The PHs offer a relatively limited service, concentrating mainly on surgical cases. Problems between the PH industry and the medical aid schemes relating to the fixing of tariffs are outlined. Controversy exists over the future of PHs. It is concluded that PHs do not form an alternative to public sector services and may in fact weaken them.

In 1986, a total of 314 private psychiatric hospitals provided inpatient services in 47 States and the District of Columbia (D.C.); 114, outpatient care services in 35 States and D.C.; and 102, partial care services in 26 States and D.C. Between 1983 and 1986, the total number of inpatient, outpatient, and partial care episodes in these hospitals increased from 333,731 to 483,284. During the 1983-86 period, the number of private psychiatric hospitals increased from 220 to 314. Almost all of this increase occurred among hospitals operating on a for-profit basis. By 1986, these hospitals represented three-quarters of all private psychiatric hospitals. With the exception of small not-for-profit hospitals, all bed-size groups in private psychiatric hospitals increased between 1983 and 1986. The number of beds in private psychiatric hospitals increased 41 percent, from 21,474 in 1983 to 30,201 in 1986. Similarly, the number of inpatient additions increased from 164,732 to 234,663 in this period, and inpatients at end of year increased from 16,079 to 24,591. The number of outpatient additions increased by more than half, from 77,589 in 1983 to 123,355 in 1986, and the outpatients at the end of the year rose from 79,598 to 135,606 (70 percent). In the same period, the number of partial care additions increased from 5,642 to 8,820, and partial care patients at the end of the year rose from 3,218 to 3,856 (20 percent). In the 1986 year-end inpatient caseload, males slightly outnumbered females, and the patient population was predominantly white, non-Hispanic. About two-fifths of the patients were under age 18, slightly over half were age 18-64 years, and 8 percent were age 65 or older. Mental illness was the major disability, with alcohol and drug abuse a distant second. By comparison, a smaller proportion of patients were under age 18 in 1983 (31 percent), and a larger proportion were age 18-64 (61 percent). In outpatient and partial care services, a more even distribution of the sexes was generally observed. Proportionately fewer outpatients were under age 18, more were between 18 and 64, and fewer were diagnosed with alcohol and drug abuse, compared with inpatient services. Also, proportionately more outpatients were Hispanic. Concomitant increases occurred in the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) staff, as well as in the amount of money expended by private psychiatric hospitals. FTE staff increased from 42,202 in June 1984 to 58,912 in November 1986.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

The number of investor-owned (proprietary) psychiatric hospitals in the United States has increased substantially in the past decade: these facilities now account for well over half of the nation's nongovernmental psychiatric hospitals. One of the reasons for this development has been the growth of multihospital chains, and another factor has been the economic advantages enjoyed by all investor-owned hospitals. These factors are likely to bring about further growth among investor-owned psychiatric hospitals in the future. Investor-owned hospitals in general, however, have become a subject of considerable controversy. Investor-owned psychiatric hospitals warrant specific consideration with respect to this controversy, particularly with respect to questions about quality of care.

This paper analyzes the neighborhood distribution of hospital closures in New York City between 1970 and 1981. Discriminant analysis procedures are used to compare the social, economic and health status characteristics of neighborhoods in which hospitals have closed with those of neighborhoods in which facilities have remained open. The results show that overall hospital closures have had a substantial distributional impact, with facilities in low-income, high infant mortality neighborhoods having the highest rates of failure. Closures of voluntary hospitals occurred most frequently in disadvantaged neighborhoods; whereas municipal and proprietary hospital closures showed no differential neighborhood impact. Implications for the geographical accessibility to various groups to health care and for the efficiency and cost of hospital services are discussed.

Proprietary hospital chains are now the predominant, and the fastest growing, segment of the for-profit sector of the hospital industry. This paper examines the relationships between the growth patterns of proprietary hospital chains and state-level variations in a number of demographic and economic factors related to health care. Results indicate that increases in the market share of proprietary chains are greatest in states that have the greatest increases in population, per capita income, and insurance coverage and that already have large proprietary market shares of beds. The growth behavior of proprietary chains thus appears to be highly consistent with standard market behavior.