No abstract

This study assesses the impact of certificate-of-need (CON) regulation for hospitals on various measures of health spending per capita, hospital supply, diffusion of technology, and hospital industry organization. Using a time series cross-sectional methodology, we estimate the net impact of CON policies on costs, supply, technology diffusion, and industry organization, controlling for area characteristics, the presence of other forms of regulation, such as hospital rate-setting, and competition. Mature CON programs are associated with a modest (5 percent) long-term reduction in acute care spending per capita, but not with a significant reduction in total per capita spending. There is no evidence of a surge in acquisition of facilities or in costs following removal of CON regulations. Mature CON programs also result in a slight (2 percent) reduction in bed supply but higher costs per day and per admission, along with higher hospital profits. CON regulations generally have no detectable effect on diffusion of various hospital-based technologies. It is doubtful that CON regulations have had much effect on quality of care, positive or negative. Such regulations may have improved access, but there is little empirical evidence to document this.

Among adults with HIV/AIDS and co-occurring MH and SA disorders, utilization of MH and SA services needs to be improved.

No abstract

This study assesses the determinants of conversions in hospital ownership from 1986 through 1996. To place such changes in context, we also analyze causes of hospital mergers and closures, which are often alternatives to hospital ownership conversion. A consistent result from our analysis is that an important antecedent of ownership conversions is a low profit margin. Conversions from private nonprofit or government ownership to for-profit status are preceded by chronically low margins and high debt-to-asset ratios. By contrast, conversions from for-profit ownership occur quickly following declines in margins. Many mergers seem motivated by a desire to increase market power—a consideration not evident for conversions.

Genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer can be compared to similar testing for colorectal cancer as a “natural experiment.” Inherited susceptibility accounts for a similar fraction of both cancers and genetic testing results guide decisions about options for prophylactic surgery in both sets of conditions. One major difference is that in the United States, Myriad Genetics is the sole provider of genetic testing, because it has sole control of relevant patents for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes whereas genetic testing for familial colorectal cancer is available from multiple laboratories. Colorectal cancer-associated genes are also patented, but they have been nonexclusively licensed. Prices for BRCA1 and 2 testing do not reflect an obvious price premium attributable to exclusive patent rights compared to colorectal cancer testing, and indeed Myriad’s per unit costs are somewhat lower for BRCA1/2 testing than testing for colorectal cancer susceptibility. Myriad has not enforced patents against basic research, and negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding with the National Cancer Institute in 1999 for institutional BRCA testing in clinical research. The main impact of patenting and licensing in BRCA compared to colorectal cancer is the business model of genetic testing, with a sole provider for BRCA and multiple laboratories for colorectal cancer genetic testing. Myriad’s sole provider model has not worked in jurisdictions outside the United States, largely because of differences in breadth of patent protection, responses of government health services, and difficulty in patent enforcement.

Long travel times have been identified as a significant barrier to accessing mental health and other critical services. This study examines whether distance to treatment was a barrier to receiving outpatient mental health and substance abuse care for HIV-positive persons when transportation was provided. Data from a cohort of HIV-positive persons who participated in a year-long substance abuse and mental health treatment programme were examined longitudinally. Transportation, which included buses, taxis, and mileage reimbursement for private transportation, was provided free of charge for participants who needed this assistance. Nearly three-quarters (74%) of participants utilized the transportation services. No statistically significant differences in retention in, or utilization of, the mental health and substance abuse treatment programme were identified by distance to the treatment site. This analysis demonstrated that increased distance to care did not decrease utilization of the treatment programme when transportation was provided to the client when necessary. These results provide preliminary evidence that distance to substance abuse and mental health services need not be a barrier to care for HIV-positive individuals when transportation is provided. Such options may need to be considered when trying to treat geographically dispersed individuals so that efficiencies in treatment can be attained.

To better understand the impact of ancillary services on access to primary care, utilization of health services, costs and health status of HIV/AIDS patients, we studied adult HIV/AIDS patients eligible for public insurance for low-income people (Medicaid) in eastern North Carolina. Using primary data from a 1997 survey of such patients linked to Medicaid claims, multivariate logit analysis was used to estimate the effect of receiving housing, legal services and substance abuse treatment and of self-reported failure to obtain transportation and child care services on: (a) adequacy and use of primary care; (b) CD-4 counts; (c) viral load; and (d) self-rated health status. Between two-thirds and four-fifths of patients needing ancillary services obtain them. Receipt of housing and legal services were found to have a positive relationship with access to primary care. Difficulties in obtaining transportation and receipt of substance abuse services had a negative relationship with receipt of adequate primary care. On balance, these findings provide some support for continued public funding for various ancillary services to improve patient access to needed primary care. At current funding levels, not all patients needing help appear able to obtain such services.