Financial and market characteristics appear to be associated with closure of rural hospitals from 2010 through 2014, suggesting that it is possible to identify hospitals at risk of closure. As closure rates show no sign of abating, it is important to study the drivers of distress in rural hospitals, as well as the potential for alternative health care delivery models.

Since 2010, more than 900 accountable care organizations (ACOs) have formed payment contracts with public and private insurers in the United States; however, there has not been a systematic evaluation of the evidence studying impacts of ACOs on care and outcomes across payer types. This review evaluates the quality of evidence regarding the association of public and private ACOs with health service use, processes, and outcomes of care. The 42 articles identified studied ACO contracts with Medicare ( N = 24 articles), Medicaid ( N = 5), commercial ( N = 11), and all payers ( N = 2). The most consistent associations between ACO implementation and outcomes across payer types were reduced inpatient use, reduced emergency department visits, and improved measures of preventive care and chronic disease management. The seven studies evaluating patient experience or clinical outcomes of care showed no evidence that ACOs worsen outcomes of care; however, the impact on patient care and outcomes should continue to be monitored.

This methodology offers improved specificity and predictive power relative to existing measures of financial distress applied to rural hospitals. This risk assessment tool may inform programs at the federal, state, and local levels that provide funding or support to rural hospitals.

Purpose During the COVID‐19 epidemic, it is critical to understand how the need for hospital care in rural areas aligns with the capacity across states. Methods We analyzed data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to estimate the number of adults who have an elevated risk of serious illness if they are infected with coronavirus in metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural areas for each state. Study data included 430,949 survey responses representing over 255.2 million noninstitutionalized US adults. For data on hospital beds, aggregate survey data were linked to data from the 2017 Area Health Resource Files by state and metropolitan status. Findings About 50% of rural residents are at high risk for hospitalization and serious illness if they are infected with COVID‐19, compared to 46.9% and 40.0% in micropolitan and metropolitan areas, respectively. In 19 states, more than 50% of rural populations are at high risk for serious illness if infected. Rural residents will generate an estimated 10% more hospitalizations for COVID‐19 per capita than urban residents given equal infection rates. Conclusion More than half of rural residents are at increased risk of hospitalization and death if infected with COVID‐19. Experts expect COVID‐19 burden to outpace hospital capacity across the country, and rural areas are no exception. Policy makers need to consider supply chain modifications, regulatory changes, and financial assistance policies to assist rural communities in caring for people affected by COVID‐19.

Our study suggests that GDMT initiation is associated with increased survival, and discontinuation of therapy is associated with reduced survival in hospitalized patients with HF. Future studies should be conducted to confirm the impact of GDMT therapy modification in this population.

Rural hospitals differ from urban hospitals in many ways. For example, rural hospitals are more reliant on public payers and have lower operating margins. In addition, enrollment in the health insurance Marketplaces of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has varied across rural and urban areas. This study employed a difference-in-differences approach to evaluate the average effect of Medicaid expansion in 2014 on payer mix and profitability for urban and rural hospitals, controlling for secular trends. For both types of hospitals, we found that Medicaid expansion was associated with increases in Medicaid-covered discharges. However, the increases in Medicaid revenue were greater among rural hospitals than urban hospitals, and the decrease in the proportion of costs for uncompensated care were greater among urban hospitals than rural hospitals. This preliminary analysis of the early effects of Medicaid expansion suggests that its financial impacts may be different for hospitals in urban and rural locations.

OBJECTIVES To assess trends and factors associated with place of death among individuals with Alzheimer's disease‐related dementias (ADRD). DESIGN Cross‐sectional analysis. SETTING Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide‐ranging OnLine Data for Epidemiologic Research, 2003‐2017. PARTICIPANTS Natural deaths occurring between 2003 and 2017 for which ADRD was determined to be the underlying cause. MEASUREMENTS Place of death was categorized as hospital, home, nursing facility, hospice facility, and other. Aggregate data included age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, sex, urbanization, and census division. Individual‐level predictors included age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, sex, marital status, and education. RESULTS From 2003 to 2017, nursing facility and hospital deaths declined from 65.7% and 12.7% to 55.0% and 8.0% while home and hospice facility deaths increased from 13.6% and .2% to 21.9% and 6.2%, respectively. Odds of hospital and hospice facility deaths declined with age while odds of nursing facility deaths increased with age. Male sex was associated with higher odds of hospital or hospice facility death and lower odds of home or nursing facility death. Nonwhite race, Hispanic ethnicity, and being married were associated with increased odds of hospital or home death and reduced odds of nursing facility death. More education was associated with higher odds of home or in a hospice facility death and reduced odds of death in a nursing facility or hospital. Significant disparities in place of death by urban‐rural status were also noted. CONCLUSION As ADRD deaths at home increase, the need for caregiver support and home‐based palliative care may become more critical. Further research should examine the care preferences and experiences of ADRD patients and caregivers, the financial impact of home death on families and insurers, and explore factors that may contribute to differences in actual and preferred place of death. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:250–255, 2020

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infected over 5 million United States (US) residents resulting in more than 180,000 deaths by August 2020. To mitigate transmission, most states ordered shelter-in-place orders in March and reopening strategies varied. OBJECTIVE: To estimate excess COVID-19 cases and deaths after reopening compared with trends prior to reopening for two groups of states: (1) states with an evidence-based reopening strategy, defined as reopening indoor dining after implementing a statewide mask mandate, and (2) states reopening indoor dining rooms before implementing a statewide mask mandate. DESIGN: Interrupted time series quasi-experimental study design applied to publicly available secondary data. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty United States and the District of Columbia. INTERVENTIONS: Reopening indoor dining rooms before or after implementing a statewide mask mandate. MAIN MEASURES: Outcomes included daily cumulative COVID-19 cases and deaths for each state. KEY RESULTS: On average, the number of excess cases per 100,000 residents in states reopening without masks is ten times the number in states reopening with masks after 8 weeks (643.1 cases; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 406.9, 879.2 and 62.9 cases; CI = 12.6, 113.1, respectively). Excess cases after 6 weeks could have been reduced by 90% from 576,371 to 63,062 and excess deaths reduced by 80% from 22,851 to 4858 had states implemented mask mandates prior to reopening. Over 50,000 excess deaths were prevented within 6 weeks in 13 states that implemented mask mandates prior to reopening. CONCLUSIONS: Additional mitigation measures such as mask use counteract the potential growth in COVID-19 cases and deaths due to reopening businesses. This study contributes to the growing evidence that mask usage is essential for mitigating community transmission of COVID-19. States should delay further reopening until mask mandates are fully implemented, and enforcement by local businesses will be critical for preventing potential future closures.