Does state-mandated reporting work? The case of surgical site infection in CABG patients

Yunwei Gai

Applied Economics, 2019, vol. 51, issue 56, 5986-5998

Abstract: This paper is the first empirical study to explore the relationship between the state-mandated reporting of surgical site infections (SSIs) and changes in infection rates, length of stay and costs among coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients. This paper uses generalized difference-in-difference (DID) methods to analyze patient discharge data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from January 2004 to December 2011 merged with state-level data on mandatory reporting status. After controlling patient and hospital characteristics, and state and year fixed effects, we do not find empirical evidence that state-mandated reporting leads to lower odds of SSIs in CABG procedure. Although it is associated with shorter length of stay and lower costs, the effect is not significant. These results suggest that merely requiring hospitals to report outcomes may not lead to significant changes at least in the case of SSIs among CABG patients.

Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2019.1645282 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:applec:v:51:y:2019:i:56:p:5986-5998

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RAEC20

DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2019.1645282

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Economics is currently edited by Anita Phillips

More articles in Applied Economics from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().