III.
Nursing Demand Model
The
NDM projects State-level demand for FTE RNs, LPNs and vocational
nurses, and nurse aides/auxiliaries and home health aides
(NA) through 2020. Moreover, the NDM projects demand for
RNs, the focus of this paper, in 12 employment settings.
Nurse demand is defined as the number of FTE RNs whom employers
are willing to hire given population needs, economic considerations,
the healthcare operating environment, and other factors.
Changing
demographics constitute a key determinant of projected demand
for FTE RNs in the baseline scenario. The U.S. Census Bureau
projects a rapid increase in the elderly population starting
around 2010 when the leading edge of the baby boom generation
approaches age 65 (Exhibit 15). Because the elderly have
much greater per capita healthcare needs compared with the
non-elderly, the rapid growth in demand for nursing services
is especially pronounced for long-term care settings that
predominantly provide care to the elderly.
Exhibit
15. Population Growth, 2000 to 2020
[D]
In addition
to State-level U.S. Census Bureau projections of changing
demographics, the NDM projects nurse demand as a function
of changing patient acuity, economic factors, and various
characteristics of the healthcare operating environment.
The
NDM (Exhibit 16), which combines input databases and projection
equations to project demand, contains two major components:
(1) the data and equations to project future demand for
healthcare services and (2) the data and equations to project
future nurse staffing intensity. It first extrapolates expected
use of healthcare services by combining national healthcare
use patterns and State population projections by age and
gender. Then, the model adjusts the healthcare use extrapolations
for each State to account for factors that cause healthcare
use to deviate from expected levels (e.g., State-level variation
in managed care enrollment rates).
Exhibit
16: Overview of the Nursing Demand Model

[D]
The
model next projects nurse staffing intensity (e.g., FTE
RNs per hospital inpatient days) as a function of current
staffing intensity and trends in major determinants of
nurse staffing intensity (e.g., average patient acuity).
Combining projected healthcare use (e.g., inpatient days)
with projected nurse staffing intensity (e.g., FTE RNs per
inpatient day) produces projections of demand for FTE RNs
by setting, State, and year. We describe the data, assumptions,
and methods used to estimate demand for healthcare services
and nurse staffing intensity, and we present our findings.
A more complete description of the NDM is available in other
reports. [5]
A.
Modeling Demand for Healthcare Services
The
demand for nurses derives from the demand for healthcare
services. To accurately project the demand for nurses, therefore,
one must first project the demand for healthcare services.
The NDM projects demand for healthcare services for half
of the 12 employment settings in the NDM (Exhibit 17). (For
five settings, demand for RNs is projected using RN-per-population
ratios. Demand for nurse educators is projected assuming
that nurse educators remain a fixed proportion of total
RN demand in each State). Measures of demand for NDM-projected
healthcare services include inpatient days, outpatient visits,
and emergency visits to short-term hospitals; inpatient
days at long-term hospitals (e.g., psychiatric, rehabilitation,
and all other hospitals); nursing facility residents; and
home health visits.
Exhibit
17. Overview of the Nursing Demand Model
| Setting |
Healthcare
Use Measure Projected |
Staffing
Intensity Measure Projected |
| Short-term
hospitals:
Inpatient
Outpatient
Emergency |
Inpatient
days
Outpatient
visits
Emergency
visits |
FTE
RNs/1,000 inpatient days
FTE
RNs/1,000 outpatient visits
FTE
RNs/1,000 emergency visits |
| Long-term
hospitals |
Inpatient
days |
FTE
RNs/1,000 inpatient days |
| Nursing
facilities |
Residents |
FTE
RNs/resident |
| Physician
offices |
NA |
FTE
RNs/10,000 population |
| Home
health |
Home
health visits |
FTE
RNs/1,000 home health visits |
| Occupational
health |
NA |
FTE
RNs/10,000 population ages 18–64 |
| School
health |
NA |
FTE
RNs/10,000 population ages 5–17 |
| Public
health |
NA |
FTE
RNs/10,000 population |
| Nurse
education |
NA |
FTE
RN educators/total FTE RNs |
| Other
healthcare |
NA |
FTE
RNs/10,000 population |
The
NDM employs a two-step process to make State-level projections
of demand for healthcare services for each of the six settings
modeled. Step 1 applies national per capita use rates for
32 population subgroups to U.S. Census Bureau population
projections for each State and year. [6]
The 32 population subgroups are defined by eight age categories
(ages 0–4, 5–17, 18–24, 25–44, 45–64, 65–74, 75–84, and
85 and older), gender, and metropolitan or non-metropolitan
location.
Multiplying
each per capita use rate by its respective State-level population
projection creates a State-level extrapolation of the expected
demand for healthcare services that controls for differences
across States and over time in demographics. (Step 2 adjusts
these extrapolations based on trends in the healthcare operating
system and other factors.)
The
following equation describes this step, where EUS,H,Y
is the expected level of healthcare use in State S
in healthcare setting H in year Y. The variables
P and R are, respectively, the size of the
population in State S and the national per capita
healthcare use for each age category (a), by gender
(s) and by metropolitan or nonmetropolitan location
(l). The first component of this equation is a calibration
factor to ensure that base year estimates of expected
healthcare use equal estimates of actual use. [7]
Step
2 adjusts up or down these initial extrapolations of healthcare
use in each State and year based on projected changes in
the healthcare operating environment, economic considerations,
and other factors. The use adjustment factor differs by
State, year, and setting and is calculated using projection
equations whose parameters describe the relationship between
healthcare use and exogenous variables.
[D]
We estimated
the parameters in the projection equations (bs) (Exhibit
18) using multiple regression analysis and a panel data
set consisting of State-level data for the period 1996 to
2000. The dependent variable in the regression equations,
measures the degree to which actual use (AU) of healthcare
services deviate from expected use (EU) in a given State
and setting during the period included in the regression
analysis as described in Step 1.
[D]
The
actual regression equations contain the logged form of the
dependent and many of the exogenous variables. Taking the
logged form of these variables has two major advantages
over the unlogged form. One, using a logged form ensures
that the model will not project a negative value of the
dependent variable. Two, the coefficients of logged exogenous
variables can be interpreted as elasticities that represent
the percentage change in the dependent variable for each
1% change in the exogenous variables (holding constant the
other variables in the model). Having the coefficients in
a common metric (e.g., elasticities) allows easier comparison
of the magnitude and precision of coefficients between variables,
across regression equations, and with empirical findings
in the literature. The health maintenance organization (HMO)
variable and the region dummy variables are the only variables
not in log form.
Selection
of the exogenous variables employed in the healthcare use
regressions, as well as those employed in the staffing intensity
regressions, was based on both theory
and empirical analysis. We considered three criteria when
determining which variables to include in the regression
equations.
- Theory-based
model specification. A logical relationship should
exist between the exogenous variable and the dependent
variable. That is, there should be a priori expectations
of the direction of the relationship between the exogenous
variable and the dependent variable based on theory and
prior empirical evidence.
- Identification
of major determinants. We used stepwise regression
to identify factors that exert a statistically significant
effect on either demand for healthcare services or nurse
staffing intensity. Stepwise regression considers the
pool of potential exogenous variables—the pool consisted
of only exogenous variables that logically would affect
the dependent variable—and adds or subtracts variables
based on the predictive power of each variable. One result
of using this approach is that nearly all the exogenous
variables in the final regression equations are statistically
significant. Unfortunately, another result of using stepwise
regression is that the statistical significance of the
regression equations and the predictive power of the equation
are overstated.
- Reliable
extrapolations of future values. We considered for
inclusion in the final regression equations only variables
whose future values can be extrapolated with some degree
of reliability or that are important for policy modeling.
Several
factors complicated the selection of exogenous variables
in the regressions. First, in a few cases an exogenous variable
is not statistically significant, though the factor that
this variable reflects is presumed essential for developing
a dynamic model (e.g., the HMO variable in the equation
to estimate RN staffing patterns in hospital inpatient settings).
We had to determine whether to include these variables with
low statistical significance. In a few cases, variables
deemed important that had a level of statistical significance
between 0.05 and 0.2 were included in the final regressions.
The coefficients on these variables are unbiased, despite
the lack of precision. We closely scrutinized these coefficients
and compared them with other findings from this analysis
and from the literature to help ensure their reasonableness.
A second
complication is that some of the exogenous variables that
theory suggests are determinants of the dependent variable—and
thus should be considered for inclusion in the equation—are
correlated. For example, HMO enrollment rate is correlated
with population density, and both HMO enrollment rates and
population density might affect healthcare use and staffing
intensity. (An example of how population density might affect
nurse-staffing patterns is that healthcare providers in
metropolitan areas might benefit from economies of scale
that rural areas might not realize.) Multicollinearity among
the exogenous variables means that their independent effects
might not be precisely estimated even though the estimated
effects are unbiased. Also, the stepwise regression approach
might result in one variable forcing a correlated variable
from the equation. Preliminary regressions were estimated
to test the robustness of the regressions with respect to
the inclusion or exclusion of correlated variables, and
the results helped determine which variables to include
or exclude from the final regression specifications.
A third
complicating factor is that some regressions contain data
from multiple years, and observations from the same State
are not completely independent, meaning some heteroskedasticity
occurs in the data. Heteroskedasticity can result in underestimates
of the coefficient standard errors, which in turn overstates
the statistical significance of the coefficients. [8]
The
dependent and exogenous variables in the equations are estimates
based on hospital census data and surveys of patients and
healthcare providers. The concern that estimates for smaller
States are less precise than estimates for larger States
led to the decision to weight each observation in the regression
by the square root of the State’s population.
Multiple
regression analysis provides estimates of the relationship
between healthcare use and its determinants. Note that the
regressions predict the relationship between healthcare
use and its determinants after adjusting for
differences in the demographic composition by age category,
gender, and urban or rural location.
Consistent
with other studies, this analysis finds that HMOs decrease
the number of inpatient days at short-term hospitals (Exhibit
18). The number of emergency department visits and nursing
facility residents also decline as HMO enrollment rates
rise. The baseline scenario assumes a 0.5 percentage point
increase annually in enrollment rates, which equates to
a 10 percentage point increase between 2000 and 2020. [9]
Consequently, the NDM projects that, in 2020, inpatient
days at short-term hospitals will decline by 3 percent,
emergency department visits will decline by 2.8 percent,
and the number of nursing facility residents will decline
by 3.6 percent relative to the levels that would exist if
no change in HMO enrollment rates occurred. State-level
estimates of HMO enrollment rates for 1996 through 2000
come from the Interstudy Competitive Edge.
As improvements
in technology and cost pressures shift more surgeries from
an inpatient to an outpatient setting, the number of inpatient
days at short-term hospitals will fall and the number of
outpatient visits and home health visits is expected to
rise. The baseline scenario assumes that per capita inpatient
surgeries will decline by 2 percent annually from 2000 to
2020 and that these surgeries will instead be performed
on an outpatient basis. For every 1 percent increase in
the proportion of hospital-based surgeries performed on
an outpatient basis, the regression findings suggest that
inpatient days will decline by 0.47 percent, outpatient
visits will increase by 1.66 percent, and home health visits
will increase by 0.86 percent. State-level estimates of
the proportion of hospital surgeries performed on an outpatient
basis were obtained from American Hospital Association (AHA)
annual Hospital Statistics publications.
An increase
in the percentage of population uninsured decreases demand
for healthcare services in long-term hospitals and nursing
facilities. The baseline scenario assumes a modest decline
in the percentage of population uninsured due to changing
demographics. The variable was primarily included to increase
the NDM’s policy analysis capabilities. A 1 percent increase
in the proportion of the population that is uninsured decreases
inpatient days at long-term hospitals by 0.38 percent and
decreases nursing facility residents by 0.16 percent.
The
percentage of population enrolled in Medicaid is positively
correlated with higher use of healthcare services in five
settings. Given that Medicaid enrollment is generally associated
with higher need for healthcare services, access to medical
services, and lower income (which some studies have found
to be correlated with greater healthcare needs), this positive
relationship is not surprising. The baseline scenario assumes
a modest change in the percentage of population enrolled
in Medicaid due to changing demographics. A 1 percent increase
in the proportion of the population enrolled in Medicaid
increases demand for inpatient days, outpatient visits,
and emergency department visits at short-term hospitals
by 0.26 percent, 0.17 percent, and 0.29 percent, respectively;
increases demand for inpatient days at long-term hospitals
by 0.26 percent; and increases demand for home health services
by 0.34 percent.
An increase
in the proportion of the population that is non-white is
associated with a slight increase in the use of short-term
hospital outpatient services and long-term hospital inpatient
days. An increase in the proportion of the population that
is Hispanic is associated with a slight decrease in emergency
department visits. These demographic variables might be
capturing differences across racial and ethnic groups in
healthcare needs, behavior that affects healthcare use,
or access to care via insurance and local availability of
services.
Population
density, as measured by percentage of population living
in an urban area, is negatively correlated with use of inpatient
services at short-term hospitals and nursing facilities.
The reader will recall that the approach already controls
for urban or rural location of the States’ population before
estimating the regressions. Consequently, these findings
are difficult to interpret. Population density is also correlated
with HMO enrollment rates. When the population density variable
is omitted from the short-term hospital inpatient day and
nursing facility regressions, the coefficients on the HMO
variable grow more negative.
The
inclusion of regional dummy variables in the regressions
improves the overall fit of many of the equations and helps
estimate more precisely the relationship between the dependent
and exogenous variables in the model. Over time, the values
of these dummy variables remain constant. After controlling
for differences in demographics and the exogenous variables
in the model, the regressions show significant regional
variation in demand for healthcare services.
Exhibit
18. Healthcare Use Regression Results
| |
Short-Term
Hospitals |
Long-Term/
Psych/Other Hospital Inpatient Days |
Nursing
Facility Residents |
Home
Health Visits |
| Inpatient
Days |
Outpatient
Visits |
Emergency
Department Visits |
| Intercept |
0.30a
(0.127) |
1.39
(0.162) |
0.50
(0.080) |
0.24
(0.173) |
-4.62
(1.151) |
0.85
(0.267) |
|
Healthcare
Operating Environment |
| Percentage
of population in an HMO |
-0.30
(0.105) |
|
-0.28
(0.075) |
|
-0.36
(0.138) |
|
| Percentage
of hospital-based surgeries performed in an outpatient
setting |
-0.47
(0.143) |
1.66
(0.206) |
|
|
|
0.86
(0.345) |
|
Economic
Conditions |
| Percentage
of population uninsured |
|
|
|
-0.38
(0.069) |
-0.16
(0.051) |
|
| Percentage
of population Medicaid eligible |
0.26
(0.040) |
0.17
(0.054) |
0.29
(0.032) |
0.26
(0.073) |
|
0.34
(0.098) |
| Per
capita personal income |
|
|
|
|
0.40
(0.116) |
|
|
Demographics |
| Percent
of population non-white |
|
0.06
(0.023) |
|
0.27
(0.029) |
|
|
| Percentage
of population Hispanic |
|
|
-0.05
(0.008) |
|
|
|
|
Geographic
Location |
| Percentage
of population in urban area |
-0.25
(0.062) |
|
|
|
-0.17
(0.089) |
|
| East-North-Central
Region |
|
|
|
-0.35
(0.054) |
|
|
| East-South-Central
Region |
0.09
(0.038) |
-0.25
(0.054) |
|
|
|
0.58
(0.095) |
| Mid-Atlantic
Region |
0.24
(0.031) |
0.15
(0.045) |
|
|
0.35
(0.051) |
0.26
(0.077) |
| Pacific
Region |
-0.35
(0.033) |
|
-0.17
(0.028) |
-0.54
(0.057) |
|
-0.56
(0.079) |
| New
England Region |
-0.19
(0.034) |
|
0.10
(0.030) |
0.30
(0.072) |
0.45
(0.055) |
0.79
(0.085) |
| South-Atlantic
Region |
|
-0.26
(0.038) |
|
|
|
|
| West-North-Central
Region |
|
|
-0.16
(0.027) |
|
|
|
| West-South-Central
Region |
|
-0.17
(0.047) |
|
|
|
0.83
(0.080) |
| Mountain
Region |
-0.27
(0.031) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Central
Regions |
|
|
|
|
0.39
(0.032) |
|
| R-Squared |
0.7659 |
0.4679 |
0.6299 |
0.5559 |
0.6061 |
0.7125 |
| Years
Included in Regression |
1996–1999 |
1996–1999 |
1996–1999 |
1996–1999 |
1996–2000 |
1996–1998 |
a
Regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.
Note:
The projection method already controlled for population
age, gender, and urban or rural location distribution before
estimating the regression equations. Also, the use of stepwise
regression to determine which exogenous variables to include
inflates the statistical significance of the results.
Modeling
Nurse Staffing Intensity
Nurse
staffing intensity is defined as the number of FTE RNs divided
by some measure of workload specific to the setting being
modeled (e.g., FTE RNs per 1,000 inpatient days at short-term
hospitals). The NDM calculates base year values of nurse
staffing intensity for each State and setting by dividing
estimates of RN employment by estimates of healthcare use.
Thus, in nursing facilities, base year estimates of employed
FTE RNs per resident are used as the staffing intensity
measures.
We use
1996 as the base year for several reasons. First, the importance
of the SSRN in estimating base-year RN supply and demand
limits the base year to a year in which the SSRN was conducted
(e.g., 1992, 1996, 2000). Second, indications that the nurse
shortage has grown more severe in recent years suggests
that an earlier year (e.g., 1996 versus 2000) might produce
nurse staffing intensity estimates that reflect a market
where a relative equilibrium existed between nurse supply
and demand. We make one exception to the argument that nurse
employment in a setting is the best measure of nurse requirements.
In hospitals, we estimate that RN demand was approximately
7 percent higher than RN employment in 1996. The lower-than-demanded
number of RNs employed in hospitals reflects the rapid and
significant changes taking place in the hospital sector
during the early and middle 1990s when hospitals were downsizing
in response to the rapid rise in managed care and hospital
consolidations. We arrive at this 7 percent estimate by
comparing RN staffing intensity in hospitals using SSRN
and AHA data for 1992, 1996, and 2000.
After
establishing base year nurse staffing intensity, the NDM
then projects future nurse staffing intensity. For four
employment settings, nurse staffing intensity is measured
as a nurse-to-population ratio (because of data limitations)
that is assumed constant over time. Demand for nurse educators
is calculated as a constant fraction of total demand for
RNs. For 7 of the 12 employment settings modeled, future
nurse staffing intensity is projected as a function of changes
in exogenous variables (X) such as average patient acuity
levels, economic considerations, and characteristics of
the healthcare operating environment. The projection formula
is specified as
[D]
where
the parameters b represent the estimated relationship between
nurse staffing intensity and its determinants and δ
is an adjustment factor so the base year projections equal
actual nurse staffing intensity in the base year. We estimated
the parameters using multiple regression analysis with State-level
data from 1996 through 2000 (although most regression equations
were estimated using a subset of these years based on data
availability).
Both
theory and empirical analysis helped determine the exogenous
variables to employ in the projection equations. As with
the healthcare use regressions, the dependent variable and
most of the exogenous variables enter into the regression
equation in a log form. Also, we estimated the equations
using a stepwise regression that results in a parsimonious
model but that overstates the significance statistics often
used to assess how robust the regression findings are.
1.
Nurse Wages
The
ratio of RN to LPN wages is used to estimate the degree
to which employers substitute lower-cost LPNs for higher-cost
RNs as RN wages rise relative to LPN wages. [10]
In the baseline projections, we assume that this ratio stays
constant over time. The regressions do not simultaneously
control for nursing supply, which could bias the wage elasticities
(e) towards zero. The size of the estimated elasticities,
however, appears reasonable based on a priori expectations
and a comparison with the literature. Demand for RNs is
less responsive to changing relative wages in physicians’
offices (e=-0.64) and inpatient settings at short-term hospitals
(e=-0.65) compared with home health (e=-1.06) and long-term
hospitals (e=-1.20).
The
wages elasticity estimates from this analysis are comparable
to the few studies in recent literature that report wage
elasticities. Lane and Gohmann (1995), in their analysis
of nurse shortages, estimate the wage elasticity of nurse
demand by simultaneously estimating a supply and demand
equation. [11] The
authors combine both RNs and LPNs in their analyses. They
estimate nurse own-wage elasticity in short-term hospitals
to be approximately -0.9.
Spetz
(1999) estimates a demand equation for RNs using hospital-level
data for short-term, general hospitals in California during
the period 1976 to 1994. To control for the endogeneity
of nurse wages, Spetz uses an instrumental variables approach
to estimate the RN demand curve, which she compares to a
demand curve estimated using the ordinary least squares
(OLS) regression. As expected, her estimate of wage elasticity
from the OLS regression (e=-0.194) is less elastic than
the estimate obtained using the instrumental variables approach
(e=-2.778) when she models the daily services units of California
hospitals. Similarly, when she estimates demand equations
for the medical-surgical units of California hospitals,
the wage elasticity estimates are less elastic from the
OLS regression (e=-0.342) than from the instrumental variables
regression (e=-3.653). Spetz also finds that an increase
in LPN wages is associated with a statistically significant
rise in RN employment in daily services units of hospitals,
but the converse is untrue.
As discussed
previously in the context of RN supply, the short-term wage
demand elasticities are typically smaller than long-term
wage elasticities. In the short term, employers might have
few options to replace RNs as they become relatively more
expensive. In the long term, employers can change nurse
staffing practices and adopt new technologies that alter
how RNs are used.
2.
HMO Enrollment Rates
An increase
in HMO enrollment rates produces mixed effects on staffing
intensity. The HMO variables in the regressions are not
logged, so the interpretation of the coefficients is different
from the other variables. An increase in the HMO enrollment
rate by one percentage point increases RN staffing intensity
in short-term hospital inpatient, short-term hospital outpatient,
and home health by 0.30 percent, 0.67 percent, and 0.97
percent, respectively. An increase in the HMO enrollment
rate by one percentage point decreases RN staffing intensity
in physician offices by 0.51 percent.
HMO
enrollment rates affect nurse-staffing patterns for two
possible reasons. One, HMOs decrease inpatient days in short-term
hospitals through efforts at preventive care and efforts
to channel patients with less-severe problems to less-expensive
settings. This reduction in inpatient days might be raising
the average acuity level of patients admitted to the hospital,
which results in higher RN staffing per 1,000 inpatient
days. Two, the efforts of HMOs to reduce costs could contribute
to their adopting technologies or substituting between different
types of healthcare professionals. As discussed previously,
HMO enrollment rates are correlated with other variables
such as percentage of population in urban area. Consequently,
the coefficient on the HMO enrollment rate variable could
be capturing some of the relationship between staffing intensity
and other factors correlated with HMO enrollment rates.
In both regressions where HMO enrollment rate affects staffing
intensity, the variable percentage of population in urban
area is also included.
3.
Hospital Inpatient and Outpatient Surgeries
Changes
in technology can exert a mixed effect on the demand for
healthcare services and staffing intensity. One measure
used in the NDM that reflects, in part, technological advances
is the percentage of hospital-based surgical procedures
performed on an outpatient basis. Improvements in technology
and medical procedures that shift some surgical procedures
from an inpatient to an outpatient setting could affect
nurse-staffing intensity in both inpatient and outpatient
settings. If patients with less-severe health problems are
shifted from an inpatient to an outpatient setting, then
average patient acuity in both settings could rise. This
situation could result in greater staffing intensity per
inpatient day and per outpatient visit while decreasing
overall nurse demand. Each 1 percent increase in the proportion
of hospital surgeries performed in an outpatient setting
increases staffing intensity for FTE RNs per 1,000 short-term
hospital inpatient days by 0.64 percent. As discussed previously,
a 1 percent increase in the proportion of hospital-based
surgeries performed on an outpatient basis reduces short-term
hospital inpatient days by 0.47 percent, increases outpatient
visits by 1.64 percent, and increases home health visits
by 1.86 percent. Surprisingly, a 1 percent increase in this
surgery variable causes virtually no change in overall demand
for RNs—it just shifts where the RNs are providing services.
4.
Healthcare Reimbursement Rates
A rise
in average Medicare and Medicaid payments for services is
associated with greater staffing intensity. Part of this
increase might be due to greater patient acuity, and part
might be due to the ability of healthcare providers to purchase
nursing services. A 1 percent increase in average Medicare
payments per home health visit increases demand for RNs
by 1 percent. A 1 percent increase in average Medicaid daily
rates for nursing facilities increases staffing intensity
of RNs in nursing facilities by 0.34 percent.
5.
Percentage of Population Uninsured
The
rate of uninsured in the population could increase the level
of uncompensated care provided by healthcare providers.
A 1 percent increase in the proportion of the population
that is uninsured decreases RNs per 1,000 short-term hospital
inpatient days by 0.37 percent and decreases RNs per 1,000
visits to physician offices by 0.21 percent. RN per 1,000
inpatient days in long-term hospitals rises by 0.3 percent
for each 1 percent increase in the rate of uninsured, although
the reason for this positive relationship is not readily
surmised.
6.
Percentage of Population Medicaid Eligible
A 1
percent rise in the proportion of population that is Medicaid
eligible decreases RN staffing per 1,000 emergency department
visits by 0.19 percent. As discussed in the previous section,
a 1 percent rise in percentage of population that is Medicaid
eligible increases demand for emergency department services
by 0.29 percent, so the net effect of a 1 percent rise in
this variable is to increase demand for RNs in emergency
departments by 0.05 percent.
7.
Per Capita Personal Income
As the
population grows wealthier, the demand for higher-quality
healthcare services likely will rise. A 1 percent rise in
per capita income increases RN staffing intensity in physician
offices by 0.33 percent.
8.
Patient Acuity Levels
A population
with greater healthcare needs requires greater levels of
services as measured by both the quantity of services provided
and staffing intensity per unit of service provided. The
NDM contains two measures that are proxies of population
health status: (1) population mean age and (2) average number
of activities of daily living (ADL) limitations of nursing
facility residents. (In addition, the Medicare and Medicaid
reimbursement rate variables discussed previously might
also be capturing variation in average patient acuity across
States and over time.) A 1 percent increase in population
mean age increases RN staffing intensity in physician offices
by 1.52 percent. A 1 percent increase in average number
of ADL limitations of nursing facility residents increases
demand for RNs per nursing facility resident by 0.63 percent.
9.
Geographic Location
The
percentage of population living in urban areas exerts a
mixed impact on nurse staffing intensity. A 1 percent increase
in this variable decreases RN staffing per 1,000 inpatient
days at long-term hospitals by 0.60 percent. In short-term
hospitals, a 1 percent increase in this variable increases
RN staffing intensity in inpatient settings and outpatient
settings by 0.16 percent and 0.39 percent, respectively.
As discussed previously, this variable is correlated with
HMO enrollment rates; consequently, the precise relationship
among HMO enrollment rate, percentage of population living
in urban areas, and nurse staffing intensity is unclear.
Significant regional variation occurs in nurse staffing
intensity, but few visible patterns emerge in the findings
(Exhibit 19). Changes in staffing intensity will vary by
State depending on the projected values for exogenous variables
and changing demographics.
Between
2000 and 2020, staffing intensity is projected to increase
34 percent in home health, from approximately 2.8 FTE RNs
per 1,000 home health visits to approximately 3.8 FTE RNs
per 1,000 visits (Exhibit 20). In short-term hospital inpatient
settings, FTE RNs per 1,000 inpatient days is projected
to increase by 18 percent at the national level (from 6.5
to 7.7). For nursing facilities and physician offices, we
project a 13 percent increase in staffing intensity, while
for short-term hospital outpatient settings we project a
6 percent increase in staffing intensity. In short-term
hospital emergency settings and in long-term hospitals,
we project virtually no change in staffing intensity. The
staffing intensity measures for RNs in occupational health,
school health, public health, nurse education, and “other”
healthcare settings is assumed constant over time at their
1996 levels. To fully comprehend the magnitude of additional
FTE RNs required, the overall impact of staffing intensity
must be considered in conjunction with healthcare use projections.
Exhibit
19. Nurse Staffing Intensity Regressions
| |
Short-Term
Hospitals |
Long-Term
Hospitals |
Nursing
Facilities |
Home
Health |
Physician
Offices |
| |
Inpatient |
Outpatient |
ED |
|
|
|
|
| Intercept |
1.62a |
-1.7 |
-0.53 |
2.69 |
-5.15 |
-5.16 |
-7.13 |
| (0.247) |
(0.122) |
(0.177) |
(0.462) |
(0.922) |
(0.787) |
(3.593) |
| Healthcare
Operating Environment |
| Ratio
of RN to LPN hourly wage |
-0.65 |
|
|
-1.20 |
|
-1.06 |
-0.64 |
| (0.258) |
|
|
(0.671) |
|
(0.537) |
(0.391) |
| Percentage
of population in an HMO (variable not logged) |
0.30 |
0.67 |
|
|
|
0.97 |
-0.51 |
| (0.202) |
(0.389) |
|
|
|
(0.316) |
(0.230) |
| Percentage
of hospital surgeries performed in outpatient setting |
0.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (0.255) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Average
Medicare payment per home health visit |
|
|
|
|
|
1.00 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(0.198) |
|
| Average
Medicaid NF daily rate |
|
|
|
|
0.34 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
(0.153) |
|
|
| Economic
Conditions |
| Percentage
of population uninsured |
-0.37 |
|
|
0.30 |
|
|
-0.21 |
| (0.069) |
|
|
(0.147) |
|
|
(0.091) |
| Percentage
of population Medicaid eligible |
|
|
-0.19 |
|
-0.19 |
|
|
| |
|
(0.091) |
|
(0.103) |
|
|
| Per
capita personal income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.33 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
(0.202) |
| Population
Health/Patient Acuity |
| Population
mean age |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.52 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
(0.761) |
| Average
number of ADL limitations of nursing facility residents |
|
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
(0.444) |
|
|
| Geographic
Location |
| Percentage
of population in urban area |
0.16 |
0.39 |
|
-0.60 |
|
|
|
| (0.114) |
(0.201) |
|
(0.206) |
|
|
|
| East-South-Central
region |
-0.11 |
|
|
|
-0.5 |
-0.22 |
|
| (0.066) |
|
|
|
(0.098) |
(0.139) |
|
| East-North-Central
region |
-0.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (0.054) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mid-Atlantic
region |
-0.34 |
|
0.15 |
-0.43 |
|
0.23 |
|
| (0.057) |
|
(0.077) |
(0.138) |
|
(0.119) |
|
| South-Atlantic
region |
|
|
|
|
-0.24 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
(0.067) |
|
|
| New
England region |
|
|
|
-0.41 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
(0.166) |
|
|
|
| West-South-Central
region |
|
-0.19 |
|
|
-0.91 |
-0.62 |
|
| |
(0.111) |
|
|
(0.091) |
(0.123) |
|
| Western
regions |
0.20 |
-0.40 |
|
0.26 |
|
|
0.16 |
| (0.045) |
(0.076) |
|
(0.103) |
|
|
(0.072) |
| Coastal
regions |
|
-0.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
(0.076) |
|
|
|
|
|
| |