Stanford Health Policy is a joint effort of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Stanford School of Medicine
FSI's research on the origins, character and consequences of government institutions spans continents and academic disciplines. The institute’s senior fellows and their colleagues across Stanford examine the principles of public administration and implementation. Their work focuses on how maternal health care is delivered in rural China, how public action can create wealth and eliminate poverty, and why U.S. immigration reform keeps stalling.
FSI’s work includes comparative studies of how institutions help resolve policy and societal issues. Scholars aim to clearly define and make sense of the rule of law, examining how it is invoked and applied around the world.
FSI researchers also investigate government services – trying to understand and measure how they work, whom they serve and how good they are. They assess energy services aimed at helping the poorest people around the world and explore public opinion on torture policies. The Children in Crisis project addresses how child health interventions interact with political reform. Specific research on governance, organizations and security capitalizes on FSI's longstanding interests and looks at how governance and organizational issues affect a nation’s ability to address security and international cooperation.
Studies of hospital demand and choice of hospital have used straight line distance from a patient's home to hospitals as a measure of geographic access, but there is the potential for bias if straight line distance does not accurately reflect travel time. Travel times for unimpeded travel between major intersections in upstate New York were compared with distances between these points. The correlation between distance and travel time was 0.987 for all observations and 0.826 for distances less than 15 miles. These very high correlations indicate that straight line distance is a reasonable proxy for travel time in most hospital demand or choice models, especially those with large numbers of hospitals. The authors' outlier analyses show some exceptions, however, so this relationship may not hold for studies focusing on specific hospitals, very small numbers of hospitals, or studies in dense urban areas with high congestion and reliance on surface streets.
Managed competition in health care is an idea that has evolved over two decades of research and refinement. It is defined as a purchasing strategy to obtain maximum value for consumers and employers, using rules for competition derived from microeconomic principles. A sponsor (either an employer, a governmental entity, or a purchasing cooperative), acting on behalf of a large group of subscribers, structures and adjusts the market to overcome attempts by insurers to avoid price competition. The sponsor establishes rules of equity, selects participating plans, manages the enrollment process, creates price-elastic demand, and manages risk selection. Managed competition is based on comprehensive care organizations that integrate financing and delivery. Prospects for its success are based on the success and potential of a number of high-quality, cost-effective, organized systems of care already in existence, especially prepaid group practices. As it is outlined here, managed competition as a means to reform the U.S. health care system is compatible with Americans' preferences for pluralism, individual choice and responsibility, and universal coverage.
Background: The California Diabetes and Pregnancy Program is a new preventive approach to improving pregnancy outcomes through intensive diabetes management preconception and early in pregnancy.
Methods: Hospital charges and length of stay data were collected on 102 program enrollees and 218 control cases. Ninety program enrollees and 90 control cases were matched on mother's age. White's classification, and race. Regression models controlled for these variables in addition to MediCal status, birth weight, and enrollment in the program.
Results: Hospital charges were about 30% less for program participants and days in the hospital were roughly 25% less. The program effects were larger for women that enrolled before 8 weeks gestation. More serious diabetics were also found to have larger reductions in charges and days.
Conclusion: After adjusting for inflation and differences in charges across hospitals, $5.19 is saved for every dollar spent on the program.
Many neonates are referred to neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) for specialized care far from their parents' residence. This distance can add to the stress of the parents and reduce the contact of the parents with their newborn. Small studies have found that back transporting these neonates to hospitals closer to their homes is safe and cost-effective. Despite these findings, the reluctance of many insurers to pay for back transports prevents or delays many back transports. Insurers may not consider the findings of the previous studies to be conclusive, given that the comparisons were between small numbers of neonates back transported and neonates who remained in tertiary care, and the potential for differences in severity of illness between the groups is significant. In this study the effect on hospital charges of back transports was examined by comparing the charges for care in community hospitals with what these charges would have been in a tertiary care center. The advantage of this method is that it avoids case-mix differences between the groups and thus minimizes the potential for small-sample bias. Data were collected for all back transports from a NICU to non-tertiary care centers (n = 90) for a 9-month period. We were able to obtain the itemized bills for the care at community hospitals for 42 of these patients. Each bill was recalculated using the charges for the NICU to determine potential for savings. The average charges for recovery care were about $6200 lower at the community hospital than they would have been at the NICU.