From: Certificate of need laws: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis
STUDY | YEARS | CONTROLS | KEY FINDINGS |
---|---|---|---|
Conover and Sloan [2] | HCFA; 1980–1998 | State characteristics, State fixed effects | Dropping CON has a 0% effect on all expenditures |
Lanning, Morrisey and Ohsfeldt [13] | HCFA; 1969, 1972, 1976–1982 | 2SLS accounts for endogeneity of CON | CON increases hospital spending 20.6%, overall spending 13.6% |
Hellinger [63] | No source reported; 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000 | State characteristics | CON decreases hospital beds by 10%, which in turn decreases spending by 1.8% |
Rivers et al. [71] | AHA; 1999–2003 | Hospital and state characteristics, state fixed effects | CON has a 0% effect on hospital spending; strict CON increases hospital spending 4.9% |
Grabowski [72] | CMS; 1981–1998 | State fixed effects | CON repeal increases Medicaid nursing home expenditures 0% |