Elsevier

Health Policy

Volume 118, Issue 3, December 2014, Pages 316-340
Health Policy

Review
Effects of physician-owned specialized facilities in health care: A systematic review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.09.012Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Review of the available evidence on the effects of physician-owned specialized facilities.

  • Examine quality and cost at physician-owned facilities and their impact on full-service general hospitals.

  • Little evidence exists in favour of physician-owned specialized facilities.

  • Impact on the performance of full-service general hospitals remains limited.

  • The development of physician-owned specialized facilities should be monitored carefully.

Abstract

Background

Multiple studies have investigated physician-owned specialized facilities (specialized hospitals and ambulatory surgery centres). However, the evidence is fragmented and the literature lacks cohesion.

Objectives

To provide a comprehensive overview of the effects of physician-owned specialized facilities by synthesizing the findings of published empirical studies.

Methods

Two reviewers independently researched relevant studies using a standardized search strategy. The Institute of Medicine's quality framework (safe, effective, equitable, efficient, patient-centred, and accessible care) was applied in order to evaluate the performance of such facilities. In addition, the impact on the performance of full-service general hospitals was assessed.

Results

Forty-six studies were included in the systematic review. Overall, the quality of the included studies was satisfactory. Our results show that little evidence exists to confirm the advantages attributed to physician-owned specialized facilities, and their impact on full-service general hospitals remains limited.

Conclusion

Although data is available on a wide variety of effects, the evidence base is surprisingly thin. There is no compelling evidence available demonstrating the added value of physician-owned specialized facilities in terms of quality or cost of the delivered care. More research is necessary on the relative merits of physician-owned specialized facilities. In addition, their corresponding impact on full-service general hospitals remains unclear. The development of physician-owned specialized facilities should thus be monitored carefully.

Introduction

In response to pervasive deficits in the quality of care [1] and skyrocketing health-care expenditure [2], the pressure to provide better and more efficient care continues to shape the health-care policy debate. Besides altering payment frameworks and the associated incentives (i.e. pay-for-quality initiatives), policymakers and providers have turned their attention to the way care is delivered. Specifically, care that has historically been delivered in a hospital inpatient setting can increasingly be performed in a more convenient short-stay or even ambulatory setting. Consequently, in the last two decades, specialized facilities have emerged beside the traditional full-service general hospital as alternative settings of care delivery. These specialized facilities are typically defined as hospitals that treat patients with specific medical conditions or those in need of specific medical or surgical procedures—most notably orthopaedic, spine, cardiac, and surgical procedures [3], [4]. Virtually all of these specialized facilities are either wholly or partly owned by physicians [3], [5], [6], [7].

The literature on the effects of physician-owned specialized facilities has expanded rapidly over the past decade. A great deal of research has been published on the theme, but the literature lacks an integrated and systematic overview on the extent to which the potential improvements in quality and cost of care are being realized. In addition, the feasibility of the approach becomes less clear when the corresponding impact on full-service general hospitals is taken into account.

Internationally, physician-owned specialized facilities have become a subject of intense policy debate. More precisely, proponents argue that these specialized facilities are ‘focused factories’, taking advantage of the associated economies of scale and scope. This potentially lowers the cost of healthcare delivery and possibly enhances the quality of care by concentrating the expertise associated with increased specialization [8]. In addition, ownership by physicians has been argued to improve quality of care, by reinforcing the physician's professional role as the primary enforcer of quality of care [9].

On the other hand, critics contend that physician ownership associated with specialized facilities presents a potential conflict of interest. Since physicians with an ownership stake generate additional revenue besides their professional fees, stronger financial incentives are induced, which could affect physicians’ practice patterns. This may lower thresholds for treatment, thus increasing the utilization of procedures [10] and focusing on the most profitable cases (e.g., well-insured patients and low-acuity procedures) [5]. This potentially undermines the financial health of full-service general hospitals [11].

The aim of this review is to assess and summarize the current evidence and to provide a structured, comprehensive overview of the evidence on physician-owned specialized facilities. We draw on the six dimensions of quality of care described by the Institute of Medicine [12]. Specifically, we investigate to what extent physician-owned specialized facilities are (1) safe, (2) effective, (3) equitable, (4) efficient, (5) patient-centred, and (6) accessible. In addition, we study (7) the impact on the performance of full-service general hospitals. Appendix 1 (Supplement) provides an overview.

Despite the increasing popularity of these facilities, no systematic evaluation or integration of the current evidence base has yet been conducted. Our results here are intended to inform policymakers of the nature of the evidence base. The next section describes the search strategy employed, as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results are presented for each dimension separately. The results are then integrated in the discussion, and the implications of our findings for research and policy are covered.

Section snippets

Data sources

This study draws upon an analysis of the literature from a systematic review perspective. The Embase, Pubmed, Cinahl, PsychInfo, Web of Science, and Eric databases, along with the Cochrane Library, were searched for relevant studies. The searches were conducted in October 2012 (Week 40). Two reviewers independently searched for relevant studies using a standardized strategy. The concepts of specialized facilities and the different dimensions of quality of care (explained above) were combined

Literature search

Our literature search initially yielded 6108 unique candidate articles. Their potential relevance was examined based on their titles, and 112 were selected for full-text retrieval (Fig. 1). The bibliographical references to these studies were examined in order to collect additional studies that had not been included in the records identified in the database search. In this way, 20 additional studies were included. On the basis of an abstract review, 75 articles (67 of which originated from our

Discussion

This paper provides an overview of the empirical literature on physician-owned specialized facilities. Our aim was to synthesize the available, though fragmentary, evidence. We structured the results according to seven substantive domains. As is typical of health services research, the reported effects are nuanced. However, the published results show some important findings.

Limitations and challenges

Our systematic review shows that the results of previous empirical studies are mixed and inconclusive. This finding supports the argument that determining and comparing hospital performance is highly complex, and that adequate measures of costs and quality are frequently not available [59]. In addition, when considering quality and the cost of the care provided, it is important to note that specialized facilities focus predominantly on elective procedures and have been found to treat more

Implications for research and policy

Notwithstanding these limitations, our findings have several implications. First, some studies have demonstrated improved performance of physician-owned specialized facilities as compared with full-service general hospitals. However, on this point the evidence base is too thin and insufficient to recommend a widespread policy of encouragement. Second, it is not clear to what extent these specialized facilities have an impact on the performance of full-service general hospitals, especially since

Conclusion

In this study, we reviewed the available evidence on physician-owned specialized facilities (specialized hospitals and ambulatory surgery centres). We examined the quality and cost of care at these facilities and their impact on the performance of full-service general hospitals. Our results show that little evidence exists in favour of physician-owned specialized facilities and that their impact to date on the performance of full-service general hospitals remains limited. Therefore, the

Declaration of conflicts of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

References (59)

  • J.M. Mitchell

    Utilization changes following market entry by physician-owned specialty hospitals

    Medical Care Research and Review

    (2007)
  • J.E. Schneider et al.

    The economics of specialty hospitals

    Medical Care Research and Review

    (2008)
  • J.R. Gabel et al.

    Where do I send thee? Does physician-ownership affect referral patterns to ambulatory surgery centers

    Health Affairs

    (2008)
  • W.J. Lynk et al.

    The effect of physician owned surgicenters on hospital outpatient surgery

    Health Affairs

    (2002)
  • S.A. Strope et al.

    Physician ownership of ambulatory surgery centers and practice patterns for urological surgery evidence from the state of Florida

    Medical Care

    (2009)
  • L.P. Casalino et al.

    Focused factories? Physician-owned specialty facilities

    Health Affairs

    (2003)
  • J.M. Hollingsworth et al.

    Physician-ownership of ambulatory surgery centers linked to higher volume of surgeries

    Health Affairs

    (2010)
  • K. Carey et al.

    Hospital competition and financial performance: the effects of ambulatory surgery centers

    Health Economics

    (2008)
  • Institute of Medicine

    Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the twenty first century

    (2001)
  • M. Al-Amin et al.

    Ambulatory surgery center and general hospital competition: entry decisions and strategic choices

    Health Care Management Review

    (2010)
  • P. Van Herck et al.

    Systematic review: effects, design choices, and context of pay-for-performance in health care

    BMC Health Services Research

    (2010)
  • P. Cram et al.

    Cardiac revascularization in specialty and general hospitals

    New England Journal of Medicine

    (2005)
  • A.S. Chukmaitov et al.

    A comparative study of quality outcomes in freestanding ambulatory surgery centers and hospital-based outpatient departments: 1997–2004

    Health Service Research

    (2008)
  • P. Cram et al.

    Acute myocardial infarction and coronary artery bypass grafting outcomes in specialty and general hospitals: analysis of state inpatient data

    Health Service Research

    (2010)
  • L. Greenwald et al.

    Specialty versus community hospitals: referrals, quality, and community benefits

    Health Affairs

    (2006)
  • A. Chukmaitov et al.

    Strategy, structure, and patient quality outcomes in ambulatory surgery centers (1997–2004)

    Medical Care Research and Review

    (2011)
  • P. Cram et al.

    A comparison of total hip and knee replacement in specialty and general hospitals

    Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American

    (2007)
  • C.D. Meyerhoefer et al.

    Patient mix in outpatient surgery settings and implications for Medicare payment policy

    Medical Care Research and Review

    (2012)
  • J.M. Mitchell

    Effects of physician-owned limited-service hospitals: evidence from Arizona

    Health Affairs

    (2005)
  • Cited by (23)

    • Evaluation of costs and outcomes of physician-owned hospitals across common surgical procedures

      2020, American Journal of Surgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      Critics of POH contend that physician ownership of a hospital is a direct financial conflict of interest. Specifically, POH may potentially aggravate healthcare disparities through deliberate targeting of lower-risk, wealthier patients, while also increasing resource utilization that in turn escalates cost of care.3–8 Meanwhile, proponents of POH claim that these hospitals are more efficient and provide better care with improved patient outcomes, in part due to the physician owner’s ability to risk-share around quality and cost of treatment.9–14

    • Financial considerations in outpatient spine surgery

      2018, Seminars in Spine Surgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      These results suggest that physician owners may be motivated by financial interests to perform more procedures and may lower their threshold for recommending surgical interventions to achieve this goal. Another criticism of physician investment in outpatient surgery centers is the potential for disparate referral patterns; mainly, stakeholders may be inclined to preferentially refer better paying patients to their ASCs over a traditional hospital which may instead see an increase in Medicaid or underinsured patients.37 Gabel et al. analyzed referral habits of physician owners and determined that they referred 92.1% of private insurance patients and 90.8% of Medicare patients to physician-owned facilities but only referred 55.4% of Medicaid patients to those facilities.40

    • Maximizing Physician-Hospital Alignment: Lessons Learned From Effective Models of Joint Arthroplasty Care

      2018, Journal of Arthroplasty
      Citation Excerpt :

      Although the Affordable Care Act placed new restrictions on the expansion of physician-owned hospitals (POHs), supporters argue that POHs provide higher quality, more efficient care [3,23]. Full-service hospitals argue that POHs “cherry pick” only the healthiest of patients in higher reimbursing specialties, increase the cost of care while decreasing patient access [24–26]. In our practice, however, we found that for primary THA and TKA, patients at our POHs had a shorter length of hospital stay with no increase in resource utilization when compared to a matched cohort of patients at our full-service acute care hospitals [27].

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text