Columbia University, USA.
J Health Econ. 2011 Jan;30(1):189-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2010.11.004. Epub 2010 Dec 2.
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.
本文探讨了《希尔-伯顿法案》(Hill-Burton Act)对私立医院规定的慈善医疗服务要求到期所产生的后果。我们利用佛罗里达州 1989 年至 2003 年的分娩数据和美国医院协会(American Hospital Association)的医院数据,研究了分娩护理和新生儿的健康状况。我们发现,慈善医疗服务要求对医院具有约束力,但有义务提供慈善医疗服务的私立医院“挑选”了风险最小的产妇。在患者特征相同的情况下,它们提供的产妇护理服务较少,但不影响患者健康。当义务期满时,私立医院迅速减少了慈善病人数量,并将产妇转移到公立医院。本文的研究结果表明,也许令人惊讶的是,要求私人医疗机构为保险不足的人提供服务可能是有效的。