4.4 Article

Quality of care in nursing homes - An analysis of relationships among profit, quality, and ownership

期刊

MEDICAL CARE
卷 41, 期 12, 页码 1318-1330

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000100586.33970.58

关键词

nursing homes; staff; cost; quality; profit

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND. Recent work has highlighted a negative correlation between proprietary status and nursing home quality of care. This relationship might be explained by the context in which proprietary homes operate. However, another possible explanation is that some proprietary homes take excessive profit to the detriment of care quality. OBJECTIVE. To examine the relationship between profit levels and quality in proprietary and nonproprietary nursing homes WHO, accounting for resident and market characteristics. METHODS. Data on 1098 free-standing NHs were taken from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, the On-line Survey Certification and Reporting System, and California licensing and statistical reports for 1998 and 1999. Tobit multivariate techniques were used to examine the relationship between deficiency citations and a range of explanatory variables, including profit. RESULTS. Proprietary homes in California had significantly lower quality of care than nonproprietary homes. A stratified analysis revealed that, controlling for resident, facility, and market characteristics, profits located within the highest 14% of the proprietary sector's profit distribution were associated with significantly more total deficiencies and serious deficiencies. This relationship was not found in nonproprietary facilities. Other factors related to deficiencies included the ethnic mix of residents and facility size. CONCLUSIONS. Within the context in which proprietary homes operate, profit above a given threshold is associated with a higher number of deficiencies. Given this and the role of the proprietary sector in NH care, careful monitoring of profit levels in this sector appears warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据