Table 5 Summary of Studies on the Effect of CON on Access
From: Certificate of need laws: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis
STUDY | DESIGN | STATES | YEARS | KEY FINDINGS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
National Studies | ||||
 Fric-Shamji and Shamji [66] | Retrospective cohort | 26 | 2004–2005 | CON has 0% effect on procedure rates, but may shift care to non-profit hospitals |
 Fric-Shamji and Shamji [67] | Retrospective cohort | 26 | 2004–2005 | CON has 0% effect on procedure rates |
 Fric-Shamji and Shamji [68] | Retrospective cohort | 26 | 2004–2006 | CON has 0% effect on procedure rates, but may shift care to teaching hospitals |
 Popescu [55] | Retrospective cohort | 50 | 2000–2003 | CON reduces that chance that a patient with AMI is admitted for revascularization by 18% |
 Ho [65] | Retrospective cohort | 50 | 1989–2002 | CON results in 19.2% fewer PCIs being performed |
 Ho et al. [59] | Retrospective cohort | 50 | 1989–2002 | Removing CON increases PCIs and CABGs by 0% |
 Short et al. [69] | Retrospective cohort | 50 | 1989–2002 | CON has 0% effect on cancer resection procedures |
 Ho, Ross et al. [65] | Retrospective cohort | 50 | 1989–2002 | CON increases CABGs by 0% |
Case Studies | ||||
 DeLia et al. [70] | Retrospective cohort | NJ | 1995–2004 | Removing CON decreases racial disparity in cardiac angiography by 3% |
 Robinson et al. [42] | Retrospective cohort | PA | 1994–1999 | Removing CON increases CABGs by 0% |
 Kolstad [39] | Retrospective cohort | PA | 1994–2003 | Removing CON decreases travel distance for CABG by 2.3 miles (9%) |