...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of health economics >Public vs. private provision of charity care? Evidence from the expiration of Hill-Burton requirements in Florida;
【24h】

Public vs. private provision of charity care? Evidence from the expiration of Hill-Burton requirements in Florida;

机译：公共提供还是私人提供慈善服务？佛罗里达州希尔·伯顿要求到期的证据；

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This paper explores the consequences of the expiration of charity care requirements imposed on private hospitals by the Hill-Burton Act. We examine delivery care and the health of newborns using the universe of Florida births from 1989 to 2003 combined with hospital data from the American Hospital Association. We find that charity care requirements were binding on hospitals, but that private hospitals under obligation "cream skimmed" the least risky maternity patients. Conditional on patient characteristics, they provided less intensive maternity services but without compromising patient health. When obligations expired, private hospitals quickly reduced their charity caseloads, shifting maternity patients to public hospitals. The results in this paper suggest, perhaps surprisingly, that requiring private providers to serve the underinsured can be effective.
机译：本文探讨了《希尔-伯顿法案》（Hill-Burton Act）对私家医院施加的慈善护理要求到期的后果。我们结合1989年至2003年佛罗里达州的出生情况，以及美国医院协会的医院数据，检查分娩护理和新生儿的健康状况。我们发现慈善机构的要求对医院具有约束力，但是，有义务承担义务的私立医院会“撇去”风险最小的孕妇。根据患者的特征，他们提供的产妇服务强度较低，但不影响患者的健康。义务到期后，私立医院会迅速减少其慈善案件量，将产妇转移到公立医院。这篇论文的结果表明，也许令人惊讶的是，要求私人提供者为投保不足的人提供服务可能是有效的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号