Literature DB >> 16638834

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

Gregory O Ginn1, Charles B Moseley.   

Abstract

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.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16638834     DOI: 10.1215/03616878-31-2-321

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law        ISSN: 0361-6878            Impact factor:   2.265


  7 in total

1.  The impact of the individual mandate and Internal Revenue Service Form 990 Schedule H on community benefits from nonprofit hospitals.

Authors:  Kristine Principe; E Kathleen Adams; Jenifer Maynard; Edmund R Becker
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Do hospitals cross-subsidize?

Authors:  Guy David; Richard C Lindrooth; Lorens A Helmchen; Lawton R Burns
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2014-06-19       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Uncompensated care provided by for-profit, not-for-profit, and government owned hospitals.

Authors:  Peter Cram; Levent Bayman; Ioana Popescu; Mary S Vaughan-Sarrazin; Xueya Cai; Gary E Rosenthal
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  Government Health and Social Services Spending Show Evidence of Single-Sector Rather Than Multi-Sector Pursuit of Population Health.

Authors:  J Mac McCullough
Journal:  Inquiry       Date:  2019 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 1.730

5.  What do nonprofit hospitals reward? An examination of CEO compensation in nonprofit hospitals.

Authors:  Karen Mulligan; Seema Choksy; Catherine Ishitani; John A Romley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Variation of hospital-based adoption of care coordination services by community-level social determinants of health.

Authors:  Jie Chen; Eva Hisako DuGoff; Priscilla Novak; Min Qi Wang
Journal:  Health Care Manage Rev       Date:  2020 Oct/Dec

7.  Defining hospital community benefit activities using Delphi technique: A comparison between China and the United States.

Authors:  Aijun Xu; Hossein Zare; Xue Dai; Yuanxi Xiang; Darrell J Gaskin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.