Modeling efficiency at the process level: an examination of the care planning process in nursing homes.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the efficiency of the care planning process in nursing homes.


METHODS
We collected detailed primary data about the care planning process for a stratified random sample of 107 nursing homes from Kansas and Missouri. We used these data to calculate the average direct cost per care plan and used data on selected deficiencies from the Online Survey Certification and Reporting System to measure the quality of care planning. We then analyzed the efficiency of the assessment process using corrected ordinary least squares (COLS) and data envelopment analysis (DEA).


RESULTS
Both approaches suggested that there was considerable inefficiency in the care planning process. The average COLS score was 0.43; the average DEA score was 0.48. The correlation between the two sets of scores was quite high, and there was no indication that lower costs resulted in lower quality. For-profit facilities were significantly more efficient than not-for-profit facilities.


CONCLUSIONS
Multiple studies of nursing homes have found evidence of inefficiency, but virtually all have had measurement problems that raise questions about the results. This analysis, which focuses on a process with much simpler measurement issues, finds evidence of inefficiency that is largely consistent with earlier studies. Making nursing homes more efficient merits closer attention as a strategy for improving care. Increasing efficiency by adopting well-designed, reliable processes can simultaneously reduce costs and improve quality.
Lee
Robert H
RH
Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, 5004 Student Center, Mail Stop 3044, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA. rlee2@kumc.edu
Bott
Marjorie J
MJ
Gajewski
Byron
B
Taunton
Roma Lee
RL
D017598:Efficiency, Organizational; D006801:Humans; D007615:Kansas; D016018:Least-Squares Analysis; D008923:Missouri; D017146:Models, Organizational; D009735:Nursing Homes / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000458:organization & administration*; D010347:Patient Care Planning / Q000458:organization & administration*; D010348:Patient Care Team / Q000458:organization & administration; D010561:Personnel Staffing and Scheduling; D019984:Quality Indicators, Health Care; D011787:Quality of Health Care; D000078329:Workforce
J Gerontol Nurs. 2005 Sep;31(9):36-44
16190011
Pharm World Sci. 2005 Jun;27(3):159-65
16096881
Health Econ. 2004 Apr;13(4):363-77
15067673
Health Care Manage Rev. 2004 Apr-Jun;29(2):107-16
15192983
Health Care Manag Sci. 2001 Sep;4(3):193-200
11519845
Med Care. 1989 Feb;27(2):154-63
2493111
Med Care. 1995 Oct;33(10):1001-21
7475400
J Gerontol Nurs. 2003 Nov;29(11):15-25
14619314
Health Care Manage Rev. 2007 Jul-Sep;32(3):253-62
17666996
J Gerontol Nurs. 2005 Feb;31(2):40-8
15756985
Health Serv Res. 1991 Apr;26(1):109-24
1826676
J Health Econ. 1994 Oct;13(3):301-16; discussion 345-6
10138856
Age Ageing. 1997 Sep;26 Suppl 2:19-25
9464550
J Health Econ. 1994 Oct;13(3):317-22
10138857
Med Care. 1990 Jun;28(6):541-51
2192198
Health Econ. 1996 Jul-Aug;5(4):363-73
8880173
J Health Econ. 1994 Oct;13(3):281-300; discussion 341-3
10138855
Int J Health Care Finance Econ. 2002 Jun;2(2):79-97
14626001
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2006 Jul;7(6):366-76
16843237
Gerontologist. 1992 Jun;32(3):360-6
1500001
Health Care Manag Sci. 2001 Sep;4(3):201-11
11519846
Health Serv Res. 2002 Apr;37(2):251-71
12035993
Eur J Health Econ. 2005 Mar;6(1):65-72
15714339
J Nurs Care Qual. 2003 Oct-Dec;18(4):259-66
14556582
J Health Econ. 1989 Dec;8(3):253-70
10304215
Health Econ. 2004 Oct;13(10):959-80
15455464
Am J Med Qual. 2004 Nov-Dec;19(6):255-65
15620077
J Nurs Adm. 2007 Jun;37(6):287-94
17563521
Health Care Manag Sci. 2005 May;8(2):149-56
15952611
Health Econ. 2005 Mar;14(3):245-56
15386654
Int J Qual Health Care. 2005 Jun;17(3):259-67
15788463
Gerontologist. 2004 Feb;44(1):24-38
14978318