ArticlePloS one2024
Patient experience with hospital care following the Maryland global budget revenue model: A difference-in-difference analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAs a result of the success of Maryland's full risk capitated payment model experiment (Global Budget Revenue) in constraining healthcare costs, there is momentum for expanding the reach of such models. However, as these models are implemented, studies analyzing their long-term effects suggest unintended spillover effects that may ultimately influence patient experiences. The aim of this study was to determine whether implementation of the GBR was associated with changes in patient experience.
methodsCross-sectional study using a difference-in-difference analysis to examine changes in patient experiences according to the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) domains before and after implementation of the GBR model. Acute care hospitals from 2010-2016 with completed HCAHPS surveys were included. Hospitals identified for inclusion were then matched, based on county location, to area level characteristics using the Area Health Resource File.
resultsA total of 844 hospitals were included. Compared to hospitals in non-GBR states, hospitals in GBR states experienced significant declines in the following HCAHPS domains: "would definitely recommend the hospital to others" [Average treatment effect (ATT) = -1.19, 95% CI = -1.97, -0.41)] and 9-10 rating of the hospital (ATT = -0.93, 95% CI = -1.71, -0.15). Results also showed significant increases in the HCAHPS domains: "if patient's rooms and bathroom were always kept clean" (ATT = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.20, 2.00). There were no significant differences in changes for the other domains, including no improvements in: nursing communication, doctor communication, help from hospital staff, pain control, communication on medicines, discharge information, and quietness of the patient environment.
conclusionThese findings suggest there should be efforts made to ascertain and mitigate potential adverse effects of care transformation initiatives on patient experience. Patients are stakeholders and their inputs should be sought and incorporated in care transformation efforts to ensure that these models align with improved patient experiences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.