Measuring hospital inefficiency: the effects of controlling for quality and patient burden of illness.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the impact of employing a variety of controls for hospital quality and patient burden of illness on the mean estimated inefficiency and relative ranking of hospitals generated by stochastic frontier analysis (SFA).


METHODS
This study included urban U.S. hospitals in 20 states operating in 2001. DATA DESIGN/DATA COLLECTION: We took hospital data for 1,290 hospitals from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey and the Medicare Cost Reports. We employed a variety of controls for hospital quality and patient burden of illness. Among the variables we used were a subset of the quality indicators generated from the application of the Patient Safety Indicator and Inpatient Quality Indicator modules of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Quality Indicator software to the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), State Inpatient Databases. Measures of a component of patient burden of illness came from the application of the Comorbidity Software to HCUP data.


METHODS
We used SFA to estimate hospital cost-inefficiency. We tested key assumptions of the SFA model with likelihood ratio tests.


RESULTS
The measures produced by the Comorbidity Software appear to account for variations in patient burden of illness that had previously been masquerading as inefficiency. Outcome measures of quality can provide useful insight into a hospital's operations but may have little impact on estimated inefficiency once controls for structural quality and patient burden of illness have been employed.


CONCLUSIONS
Choices about controlling for quality and patient burden of illness can have a nontrivial impact on mean estimated hospital inefficiency and the relative ranking of hospitals generated by SFA.
Mutter
Ryan L
RL
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Center for Delivery, Organization and Markets, Rockville, MD, USA. rmutter@ahrq.gov
Rosko
Michael D
MD
Wong
Herbert S
HS
D000465:Algorithms; D017281:Cost of Illness; D017598:Efficiency, Organizational / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D019538:Health Care Surveys; D006761:Hospitals / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D019984:Quality Indicators, Health Care; D011787:Quality of Health Care; D013269:Stochastic Processes; D014481:United States
J Med Syst. 1999 Feb;23(1):57-71
10321380
J Health Econ. 1996 Feb;15(1):1-21
10157423
Health Care Manag Sci. 2004 Feb;7(1):7-16
14977089
Inquiry. 2003 Spring;40(1):25-38
12836906
Med Care Res Rev. 2004 Jun;61(2):135-70
15155049
Health Care Manag Sci. 1999 May;2(2):63-74
10916603
QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1992 Nov;18(11):361-71
1465294
Am J Public Health. 1997 Mar;87(3):429-33
9096547
Inquiry. 2007 Fall;44(3):335-49
18038868
J Health Polit Policy Law. 1994 Winter;19(4):729-51
7860966
Int J Health Care Finance Econ. 2004 Jun;4(2):131-57
15211103
Health Aff (Millwood). 2003 Mar-Apr;22(2):154-66
12674418
JAMA. 2003 Oct 8;290(14):1868-74
14532315
Med Care. 2001 Jul;39(7):727-39
11458137
Health Econ. 2001 Dec;10(8):683-98
11747051
Health Care Manag Sci. 2001 Jun;4(2):73-81
11393744
J Health Econ. 1994 Oct;13(3):255-80; discussion 335-40
10138854
Health Serv Res. 2008 Oct;43(5 Pt 2):1830-48
18783457
N Engl J Med. 1999 Jan 28;340(4):293-9
9920955
Inquiry. 2002-2003 Winter;39(4):388-99
12638713
Med Care Res Rev. 2008 Apr;65(2):131-66
18045984
Health Care Manage Rev. 2005 Oct-Dec;30(4):347-60
16292012
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008 Mar;34(3):154-63
18419045
Health Econ. 2006 Apr;15(4):419-31
16389631
Med Care. 1998 Jan;36(1):8-27
9431328