The impact of organizational accreditation and professional certification and the evidence-based measurable impact of those for both academic programs and affiliates is one of specific interest to universities and individuals in the healthcare management field [1]. The authors’ analysis examined the impact of hiring graduates from higher education programs that held external accreditation from the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education (CAHME). Graduates’ affiliation with the American College of Healthcare Executives (ACHE) professional healthcare leadership organization was also assessed as an independent variable. Study outcomes focused on these graduates’ respective healthcare organization’s performance measures (cost, quality, and access) to assess the researchers’ inquiry into the perceived value of a CAHME-accredited graduate degree in healthcare administration and a professional ACHE affiliation [2]. The results from this study found no effect of CAHME accreditation or ACHE affiliation on healthcare organization performance outcomes. The study findings support the need for future research surrounding healthcare administration professional graduate degree program characteristics and leader development affiliations, as perceived by various industry stakeholders.

The purpose of this research is to determine if the tradeoffs that Kissick proposed among cost containment, quality, and access remain as rigidly interconnected as originally conceived in the contemporary health care context. Although many have relied on the Kissick model to advocate for health policy decisions, to our knowledge, the model has never been empirically tested. Some have called for policy makers to come to terms with the premise of the Kissick model tradeoffs, others have questioned the model given the proliferation of quality enhancing initiatives, automation, and information technology in the health care industry. One wonders whether these evolutionary changes alter or disrupt the originality of the Kissick paradigms themselves. Methods: Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to evaluate the Kissick hypothetical relationships among the unobserved constructs of cost, quality, and access in hospitals for the year 2018. Hospital data were obtained from Definitive Healthcare a subscription site which contains Medicare data as well as non-Medicare data for networks, hospitals, and clinics (final n= 2,766). Results: Reporting significant net effects as defined by our chosen study variables, we find that as quality increases costs increase, as access increases quality increases, and as access increases, costs increase. Policy and Practice Implications: Our findings lend continued relevance to a balanced approach to health care policy reform efforts. Simultaneously bending the health care cost curve, increasing access to care, and advancing quality of care is as challenging now as it was when the Kissick model was originally conceived.

Healthcare leaders are faced with many financial challenges in the contemporary environment, leading to many bankruptcies in recent years. What is not well understood are the specific conditions that lead to organizational economic failure. Ideally, hospital leaders could examine the literature for guidance to predict bankruptcy before it occurs. However, existing regression methods have proven inadequate, especially when the finance variables follow a nonnormal frequency pattern. Furthermore, the regression approach encounters difficulties due to multicollinearity and nonnormality issues. Therefore, an alternate stochastic approach for predicting the probability of hospital bankruptcy is warranted. This new method includes computing and interpreting the correlations between the hospital’s revenue and expenses for bivariate lognormal data, calculating the risk of bankruptcy due to the mismatch between revenues and expenses, determining the likelihood of a hospital’s expense exceeding the state’s median expense level, and evaluating a hospital’s financial memory level. Ultimately in our research, we demonstrate a novel approach to anticipate hospital bankruptcy, which can be particularly useful for health policy analysts and hospital leaders in making informed financial decisions and proactively managing risks to ensure the sustainability and stability of their institutions.

Hospitals are perpetually challenged by the dual requirements of concurrently improving the quality of healthcare and maintaining financial solvency. Both issues are among the top concerns for hospital executives across the United States, yet some have questioned if the efforts to enhance quality are financially sustainable. led us to examine if improving quality in the hospital setting impacts revenue. Using multivariate regression, we assessed if numerous quality measures were associated with our targeted measure of hospital profitability: the net patient revenue per adjusted discharge. The independent variables included the HCAHPS Summary Star Rating, Hospital Compare Overall Rating, All-Cause hospital-wide Readmission Rate, Total Performance Score, Clinical Outcomes Domain Score, Safety Domain Score, Person and Community Engagement Domain Score, and the Efficiency and Cost Reduction Score. Our results indicated that improving quality was significantly associated with improved net patient revenue per adjusted discharge for seven of the eight of these quality measures at the hospital level. It is clear that failing to address quality and patient safety issues is costly for US hospitals, thus we believe our findings support the premise that increased attention to the quality of care delivered as well as patients’ perceptions of care may allow hospitals to accentuate profitability and advance a hospital’s financial position.