Ginn Gregory O, Moseley Charles B
University of Nevada Las Vegas, USA.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2006 Apr;31(2):321-44. doi: 10.1215/03616878-31-2-321.
This study examined the effect of state community benefit laws and guidelines on the community health orientation and the provision of hospital-based health promotion services in hospitals. The sample included all not-for-profit and investor-owned acute-care hospitals in the United States during the year 2000. Multiple regression procedures were used to test the effect of community benefit laws and type of ownership while controlling for organizational and environmental variables. The results of these procedures indicated that, on average, not-for-profit hospitals in the ten states with community benefit laws/guidelines reported significantly more community health orientation activities than did not-for-profit hospitals in the forty other states. The results of the multiple regression procedures also indicated that, on average, the investor-owned hospitals in the ten states with laws/guidelines reported significantly more community health orientation activities than did the investor-owned hospitals in the forty other states. The study found that community benefit laws had the effect of decreasing ownership-related differences in reported community health orientation activities. Further, Levene's test of equality of variance showed that the not-for-profit hospitals in community benefit states exhibited significantly lower variance in the community health orientation activities when compared with the not-for-profit hospitals in non-community benefit states. However, none of the statistical tests supported the hypotheses that community benefit laws compelled or induced hospitals to offer significantly more health promotion services. The study concluded that coercive measures such as community benefit laws were effective in compelling not-for-profit hospitals to report increased community orientation activities, and it also concluded that the mimetic pressures associated with these laws were effective in inducing investor-owned hospitals to report increased community orientation activities.
本研究考察了州社区福利法和指导方针对医院社区健康导向以及医院提供基于医院的健康促进服务的影响。样本包括2000年美国所有非营利性和投资者所有的急症护理医院。在控制组织和环境变量的同时,使用多元回归程序来检验社区福利法和所有制类型的影响。这些程序的结果表明,平均而言,在有社区福利法/指导方针的十个州中的非营利性医院,比其他四十个州的非营利性医院报告了显著更多的社区健康导向活动。多元回归程序的结果还表明,平均而言,在有法律/指导方针的十个州中的投资者所有医院,比其他四十个州的投资者所有医院报告了显著更多的社区健康导向活动。该研究发现,社区福利法起到了减少报告的社区健康导向活动中与所有制相关差异的作用。此外,Levene方差齐性检验表明,与非社区福利州的非营利性医院相比,社区福利州的非营利性医院在社区健康导向活动中的方差显著更低。然而,没有任何统计检验支持社区福利法迫使或诱导医院提供显著更多健康促进服务的假设。该研究得出结论,诸如社区福利法之类的强制性措施有效地迫使非营利性医院报告增加的社区导向活动,并且还得出结论,与这些法律相关的模仿压力有效地诱导投资者所有医院报告增加的社区导向活动。