The number of new coronavirus cases is growing in most states. As the pandemic continues to strain U.S. health care systems, a tool developed by RAND researchers can help hospitals prepare for the worst.
Price regulations face political obstacles and have been strongly opposed by medical providers. But setting prices for all commercial health care payers could reduce hospital spending by $61.9 billion to $236.6 billion a year if the rates were set at 100 to 150 percent of the amounts paid by Medicare.
The lack of reliable, state-level data on firearm injuries is a challenge for gun policy researchers. As part of the Gun Policy in America initiative, RAND researchers developed a publicly available longitudinal database of state-level estimates of inpatient hospitalizations that occur as a result of firearm injury.
RAND researchers used data from 49 states and Washington, D.C., to assess hospital prices paid by private health plans. Data sources included $33.8 billion in spending from 3,112 community hospitals—more than half of community hospitals nationwide.
Among strategies to curb hospital prices among the commercially insured population in the United States, direct price regulations such as setting rates are likely to achieve greater savings than other approaches like increasing competition or improving price transparency.
Although many emergency departments (EDs) have telestroke capacity, it is unclear why some EDs consistently use telestroke and others do not. We compared the characteristics and practices of EDs with robust and low assimilation of telestroke.
Our aim was to determine if the Medicare Shared Savings Program is associated with changes in readmissions and mortality for patients hospitalized with ischemic stroke, and whether it has a different impact on safety net hospitals and non-SNHs.
We examined whether hospitals at risk of relatively large penalties from this expansion experienced greater declines in joint replacement readmissions compared with hospitals at risk of smaller penalties.
This article assesses whether differences in readmission rates between safety-net hospitals (SNH) and non-SNHs are due to differences in hospital quality, and compares the results of hospital profiling with and without adjusting for socioeconomic status.
The goal of this exploratory analysis was to examine the changes in hospital star rankings for aortic valve replacement when shrinkage targets based on hospital case volume are used instead of the standard CMS approach.
We assessed whether safety net hospitals, which serve vulnerable patients, were more likely to be penalized and less likely to receive rewards compared with non-safety net hospitals that serve few vulnerable patients.
This study determined potential racial and ethnic disparities in risk for all-cause 30-day readmission among traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries initially hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or pneumonia.
This article determines whether Medicare's Nonpayment Program was associated with changes in incidence of hospital-acquired conditions, and whether this association varies across hospitals with differential Medicare patient load.
Monte Carlo simulation was used to examine the accuracy of performance profiling as a function of statistical methodology, case volume, and the extent to which hospital or physician performance deviates from the average.
To examine whether the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) predicted risk of major complications can be used to identify surgical patients at risk for rehospitalization.
We sought to develop and validate a risk index for in-hospital mortality using only present-on-admission diagnoses, principal procedures, and secondary procedures occurring before the date of the principal procedure.