title: Insurance status of patients admitted to specialty cardiac and competing general hospitals: are accusations of cherry picking justified?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  There has been widespread concern that procedurally oriented specialty hospitals select well-insured patients for admission, while avoiding the underinsured, but data are limited.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To determine if specialty cardiac hospitals admit a higher proportion of well-insured patients than general hospitals and/or preferentially transfer patients with less generous insurance to other acute care hospitals.
  
  
  METHODS
  A retrospective study of patients admitted to specialty cardiac and general hospitals with acute myocardial infarction (AMI; N = 41,863), congestive heart failure (CHF; N = 51,696), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; N = 73,966), and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG; N = 33,327) using 2000-2004 all-payor data from Arizona, California, and Texas.
  
  
  METHODS
  Proportion of all admissions in specialty and general hospitals with more generous insurance (Medicare or private insurance), interhospital transfer patterns of patients with less generous insurance by specialty and general hospitals.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Specialty hospitals admitted a higher proportion of patients with more generous insurance for both the medical cohort (AMI and CHF) (92.4% vs. 89.0%; P < 0.0001) and revascularization cohort (PCI and CABG) (94.3% vs. 90.6%; P < 0.0001). After adjustment for patient demographics, comorbidity, and the distance that each patient lived from the nearest specialty and general hospital, odds of admission to specialty hospitals were significantly higher for patients with more generous insurance compared to patients with less generous insurance for the medical cohort [odds ratio (OR), 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.07-1.27; P < 0.001] and revascularization cohort (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.08-1.27; P < 0.001). In Cox proportional hazards models, there was no evidence that specialty hospitals were more or less likely to transfer patients with more or less generous insurance to another hospital.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The analysis was limited to 3 states and we were unable to track the care of patients after transfer.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Patients with more generous insurance are significantly more likely to gain admission to specialty hospitals. Alternatively, we found no evidence that specialty hospitals preferentially transfer patients with less generous insurance who are admitted. Overall, these findings suggest that specialty hospitals may contribute to segregation of the healthcare system along socioeconomic lines.
authors.affiliation: Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA. peter-cram@uiowa.edu
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Cram
authors.forename: Hoangmai H
authors.initials: HH
authors.lastname: Pham
authors.forename: Levent
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Bayman
authors.forename: Mary S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Vaughan-Sarrazin
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D016208:Databases, Factual; D005260:Female; D054625:Healthcare Disparities; D006331:Heart Diseases / Q000191:economics / Q000601:surgery; D006760:Hospitalization / Q000191:economics*; D006782:Hospitals, Special / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D019458:Insurance Coverage / Q000191:economics*; D007348:Insurance, Health / Q000191:economics*; D008297:Male; D006278:Medicare; D008875:Middle Aged; D009204:Myocardial Revascularization / Q000191:economics; D010343:Patient Admission / Q000191:economics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D010360:Patient Transfer / Q000191:economics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017149:Private Sector; D016016:Proportional Hazards Models; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D014481:United States; D016270:United States Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality