title: Staffing ratios and quality: an analysis of minimum direct care staffing requirements for nursing homes.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To study the impact of minimum direct care staffing (MDCS) requirements on nurse staffing levels, nurse skill mix, and quality.
  
  
  METHODS
  U.S. nursing home facility data from the Online Survey Certification and Reporting (OSCAR) System merged with MDCS requirements. STUDY DESIGN; Facility-level outcomes of nurse staffing levels, nurse skill mix, and quality measures are regressed on the level of nurse staffing required by MDCS requirements in the prior year and other controls using fixed effect panel regression. Quality measures are care practices, resident outcomes, and regulatory deficiencies.
  
  
  METHODS
  Analysis used all OSCAR surveys from 1999 to 2004, resulting in 17,552 unique facilities with a total of 94,371 survey observations.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The effect of MDCS requirements varied with reliance of the nursing home on Medicaid. Higher MDCS requirements increase nurse staffing levels, while their effect on nurse skill mix depends on the reliance of the nursing home on Medicaid. MDCS have mixed effects on care practices but are generally associated with improved resident outcomes and meeting regulatory standards.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  MDCS requirements change staffing levels and skill mix, improve certain aspects of quality, but can also lead to use of care practices associated with lower quality.
authors: Department of Economics, Farmer School of Business, Miami University, 800 E. High Street, Oxford, OH 45056, USA. jbowblis@muohio.edu
authors: John R
authors: JR
authors: Bowblis
references: J Health Econ. 2006 Mar;25(2):234-47
references: 16443294
references: Gerontologist. 1993 Dec;33(6):721-9
references: 8314098
references: J Gerontol Nurs. 2005 Mar;31(3):9-15
references: 15799632
references: Health Serv Res. 2007 Jun;42(3 Pt 1):1105-29
references: 17489906
references: Gerontologist. 1994 Dec;34(6):775-86
references: 7843607
references: Health Econ. 2011 Jul;20(7):802-16
references: 20672247
references: Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Sep-Oct;23(5):243-52
references: 15371395
references: J Gerontol Nurs. 1994 Jun;20(6):17-21
references: 8006350
references: Rev Econ Stat. 2008 Nov 1;90(4):754-764
references: 20463859
references: Gerontologist. 2004 Feb;44(1):13-23
references: 14978317
references: Health Econ. 2011 Jun;20(6):631-44
references: 21456048
references: Am J Med Qual. 1996 Winter;11(4):222-6
references: 8972940
references: Health Serv Res. 2008 Jun;43(3):1025-42
references: 18454779
references: Inquiry. 2003 Spring;40(1):39-56
references: 12836907
references: Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jan-Jun;Suppl Web Exclusives:W4-363-73
references: 15451956
references: J Health Econ. 1996 Feb;15(1):23-48
references: 10157427
references: Health Serv Res. 2009 Feb;44(1):56-78
references: 18823448
references: J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2005 Jan-Feb;6(1):27-33
references: 15871868
references: Med Care Res Rev. 2008 Aug;65(4):514-27
references: 18369236
references: J Gerontol Nurs. 2005 Feb;31(2):18-23
references: 15756982
references: Gerontologist. 2009 Feb;49(1):81-90
references: 19363006
references: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2009 Mar;64(2):269-78
references: 19181692
references: Gerontologist. 2006 Feb;46(1):74-80
references: 16452286