Ownership type and community benefits of women's health centers

Pharmaceutical policies: effects of regulating drug insurance schemes

BACKGROUND

Drug insurance schemes are systems that provide access to medicines on a prepaid basis and could potentially improve access to essential medicines and reduce out-of-pocket payments for vulnerable populations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects on drug use, drug expenditure, healthcare utilisation and healthcare outcomes of alternative policies for regulating drug insurance schemes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases, and two trials registers between November 2014 and September 2020, including a citation search for included studies on 15 September 2021 using Web of Science. We screened reference lists of all the relevant reports that we retrieved and reports from the Background section. Authors of relevant papers, relevant organisations, and discussion lists were contacted to identify additional studies, including unpublished and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised trials, non-randomised trials, interrupted time-series studies (including controlled ITS [CITS] and repeated measures [RM] studies), and controlled before-after (CBA) studies. Two review authors independently assessed the search results and reference lists of relevant reports, retrieved the full text of potentially relevant references and independently applied the inclusion criteria to those studies. We resolved disagreements by discussion, and when necessary by including a third review author. We excluded studies of the following pharmaceutical policies covered in other Cochrane Reviews: those that determined how decisions were made about which conditions or drugs were covered; those that placed restrictions on reimbursement for drugs that were covered; and those that regulated out-of-pocket payments for drugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies and assessed risk of bias for each study, with disagreements being resolved by consensus. We used the criteria suggested by  Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC)  to assess the risk of bias of included studies. For randomised trials, non-randomised trials and controlled before-after studies, we planned to report relative effects. For dichotomous outcomes, we reported the risk ratio (RR) when possible and adjusted for baseline differences in the outcome measures. For interrupted time series and controlled interrupted time-series studies, we computed changes along two dimensions: change in level; and change in slope. We undertook a structured synthesis following the EPOC guidance on this topic, describing the range of effects found in the studies for each category of outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 58 studies that met the inclusion criteria (25 interrupted time-series studies and 33 controlled before-after studies). Most of the studies (54) assessed a single policy implemented in the United States (US) healthcare system: Medicare Part D. The other four assessed other drug insurance schemes from Canada and the US, but only one of them provided analysable data for inclusion in the quantitative synthesis. The introduction of drug insurance schemes may increase prescription drug use (low-certainty evidence). On the other hand, Medicare Part D may decrease drug expenditure measured as both out-of-pocket spending and total drug spending (low-certainty evidence). Regarding healthcare utilisation, drug insurance policies (such as Medicare Part D) may lead to a small increase in visits to the emergency department. However, it is uncertain whether this type of policy increases or decreases hospital admissions or outpatient visits by beneficiaries of the scheme because the certainty of the evidence was very low. Likewise, it is uncertain if the policy increases or reduces health outcomes such as mortality because the certainty of the evidence was very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of drug insurance schemes such as Medicare Part D in the US health system may increase prescription drug use and may decrease out-of-pocket payments by the beneficiaries of the scheme and total drug expenditures. It may also lead to a small increase in visits to the emergency department by the beneficiaries of the policy. Its effects on other healthcare utilisation outcomes and on health outcomes are uncertain because of the very low certainty of the evidence. The applicability of this evidence to settings outside US healthcare is limited.

Organizational Factors Associated With Quality Perinatal Care

Perinatal care has been recognized as an integral part of ensuring quality health care in hospitals, and the focus on perinatal care quality is increasing. The previous hospital literature has focused much attention on measuring and improving quality of care generally, but recently there has been a call for a more comprehensive approach to measuring quality in the perinatal care setting. The perinatal literature is limited in addressing the association between organizational factors and perinatal quality. Using chart audit data for more than 10 000 maternity patients, we used multiple regression analysis to examine the association of organizational factors and perinatal quality of care. Findings show that ownership, setting (location), and hospital policy on infant feeding were statistically significant. Findings suggest that it is important that hospital boards and leaders develop and implement organizational policies to enhance perinatal quality of care.

Comparison of three models of ownership of community health centres in China: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Community health centres are the main form of provision of primary care in China. There are three models: government managed, hospital managed and private. Our aim was to describe and compare primary care under the three ownership models.

METHODS

Four aspects of primary care were studied: services, organization, financing and human resources. Interviews were undertaken with 60 managerial and professional staff in 13 community health centres in the Pearl River Delta region in 2010. Three community health centres were selected in the capital city and two were selected from each of the other five cities. Thematic framework analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Government-managed community health centres received the largest public funding, followed by hospital-managed community health centres, while private community health centres received the least. Private community health centres were the smallest in scale and provided lower quality public health services compared with the other two models. Patient out-of-pocket costs accounted for the majority of the revenue in all models of community health centres despite improved government funding for preventive services. General challenges such as the shortage of public funding, the exclusion of migrants in the funding for preventive services, low capacity in human resources and the separation of clinical and preventive care in community health centres were identified in all three models of community health centres.

CONCLUSIONS

The ownership and management of a community health centre greatly influence the service it provides. Private community health centres are in a disadvantaged position to deliver high quality clinical and preventive care.

The impact of state community benefit laws on the community health orientation and health promotion services of hospitals

This study examined the effect of state community benefit laws and guidelines on the community health orientation and the provision of hospital-based health promotion services in hospitals. The sample included all not-for-profit and investor-owned acute-care hospitals in the United States during the year 2000. Multiple regression procedures were used to test the effect of community benefit laws and type of ownership while controlling for organizational and environmental variables. The results of these procedures indicated that, on average, not-for-profit hospitals in the ten states with community benefit laws/guidelines reported significantly more community health orientation activities than did not-for-profit hospitals in the forty other states. The results of the multiple regression procedures also indicated that, on average, the investor-owned hospitals in the ten states with laws/guidelines reported significantly more community health orientation activities than did the investor-owned hospitals in the forty other states. The study found that community benefit laws had the effect of decreasing ownership-related differences in reported community health orientation activities. Further, Levene's test of equality of variance showed that the not-for-profit hospitals in community benefit states exhibited significantly lower variance in the community health orientation activities when compared with the not-for-profit hospitals in non-community benefit states. However, none of the statistical tests supported the hypotheses that community benefit laws compelled or induced hospitals to offer significantly more health promotion services. The study concluded that coercive measures such as community benefit laws were effective in compelling not-for-profit hospitals to report increased community orientation activities, and it also concluded that the mimetic pressures associated with these laws were effective in inducing investor-owned hospitals to report increased community orientation activities.

Mortalidade hospitalar e tempo de permanência: comparação entre hospitais públicos e privados na região de Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brasil

A avaliação de desempenho dos serviços de saúde é essencial. A comparação de indicadores de desempenho requer o uso de estratégias de ajuste de risco. O objetivo deste artigo é avaliar variações no desempenho clínico, mensurado pela mortalidade e pelo tempo de permanência, entre hospitais públicos e privados, levando em conta diferenças nas características dos pacientes tratados. Este estudo é limitado à região de Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brasil. Entre os anos de 1996 e 1998, 32.906 pacientes admitidos com diagnósticos cardiovasculares e respiratórios foram estudados. As variáveis usadas para o ajuste de risco dos indicadores de desempenho foram: sexo, idade, diagnóstico principal e medidas de gravidade baseada em comorbidade. Os resultados mostraram que o desempenho clínico dos hospitais públicos, mensurado pela mortalidade hospitalar ajustada (razão de chance = 0,41), é superior ao dos privados. Os hospitais públicos e privados não foram estatisticamente diferentes com relação ao tempo de permanência dos pacientes. Ainda que problemas conceituais e metodológicos devam ser resolvidos, taxa de mortalidade e outros indicadores de desempenho ajustados devem ser considerados como instrumentos úteis para identificar problemas de desempenho dos serviços de saúde.