Abstract
This article focuses on a hospital group that has not received adequate attention in the literature: the sole provider of short-term, acute hospital care located in a county. In Tennessee, SPHs (single provider hospitals) are fewer in number but are present in more counties than multiprovider hospitals (MPHs). They are smaller in size, less labor and capital intensive, more likely to be a government hospital, and more likely to be in a rural area with low income and limited health care resources. SPHs operate with lower costs, charge patients less, and have lower revenue write-offs than MPHs. As a result, their cash flow is sufficient to fund their depreciation and they consistently earn modest returns. Between 1982 and 1988, a total of 16 hospitals failed in Tennessee but only 3 were SPHs. While SPHs have not been profitable enough to make them ideal candidates for takeover by major hospital systems, they are not a population that is unduly at risk.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Baucus M. Keeping rural hospitals open and affordable. Bus Health. 1987 Apr;4(6):22–24. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chang C. F., Tuckman H. P. The profits of not-for-profit hospitals. J Health Polit Policy Law. 1988 Fall;13(3):547–564. doi: 10.1215/03616878-13-3-547. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Christianson J. B., Faulkner L. The contribution of rural hospitals to local economies. Inquiry. 1981 Spring;18(1):46–60. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mullner R. M., McNeil D. Rural and urban hospital closures: a comparison. Health Aff (Millwood) 1986 Fall;5(3):131–141. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.5.3.131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tuckman H. P., Chang C. F. Hub-spoke and hub-sub delivery systems in health care and their effect on the competitive strategies of providers. Hosp Top. 1989 Nov-Dec;67(6):6–12. doi: 10.1080/00185868.1989.10544749. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]