Hospital ownership, decisions on supervisory board characteristics, and financial performance.

BACKGROUND: Dynamic and complex transformations in the hospital market increase the relevance of good corporate governance. However, hospital performance and the characteristics of supervisory boards differ depending on ownership. The question therefore arises whether hospital owners can influence performance by addressing supervisory board characteristics. PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to explain differences in the financial performance of hospitals with regard to ownership by studying the size and composition of supervisory boards. METHODOLOGY: The AMADEUS database was used to collect information on hospital financial performance in 2009 and 2010. Business and quality reports, hospital websites, and data from health insurer were used to obtain information on hospital and board characteristics. The resulting sample consisted of 175 German hospital corporations. We utilized ANOVA and regression analysis to test a mediation hypothesis that investigated whether decisions regarding board size and composition were associated with financial performance and could explain performance differences. FINDINGS: Financial performance and board size and composition depend on ownership. An increase in board size and greater politician participation were negatively associated with all five tested measures of financial performance. Furthermore, an increase in physician participation was positively associated with one dimension of financial performance, whereas one negative relationship was identified for nurse and economist participation. For clerics, no associations were found. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Decisions concerning board size and composition are important as they relate to hospital financial performance. We contribute to existing research by showing that, in addition to board size and physician participation, the participation of other professionals can also influence financial performance.

Cost-effectiveness of different strategies for selecting and treating individuals at increased risk of osteoporosis or osteopenia: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To compare cost-effectiveness modeling analyses of strategies to prevent osteoporotic and osteopenic fractures either based on fixed thresholds using bone mineral density or based on variable thresholds including bone mineral density and clinical risk factors. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by using the MEDLINE database and reference lists from previous reviews. On the basis of predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, we identified relevant studies published since January 2006. Articles included for the review were assessed for their methodological quality and results. RESULTS: The literature search resulted in 24 analyses, 14 of them using a fixed-threshold approach and 10 using a variable-threshold approach. On average, 70% of the criteria for methodological quality were fulfilled, but almost half of the analyses did not include medication adherence in the base case. The results of variable-threshold strategies were more homogeneous and showed more favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios compared with those based on a fixed threshold with bone mineral density. For analyses with fixed thresholds, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios varied from €80,000 per quality-adjusted life-year in women aged 55 years to cost saving in women aged 80 years. For analyses with variable thresholds, the range was €47,000 to cost savings. CONCLUSIONS: Risk assessment using variable thresholds appears to be more cost-effective than selecting high-risk individuals by fixed thresholds. Although the overall quality of the studies was fairly good, future economic analyses should further improve their methods, particularly in terms of including more fracture types, incorporating medication adherence, and including or discussing unrelated costs during added life-years.