Ashish K. Jha

Bio: Ashish K. Jha is an academic researcher from Brown University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Health care & Population. The author has an hindex of 87, co-authored 503 publications receiving 30020 citations. Previous affiliations of Ashish K. Jha include James Cook University Hospital & VA Boston Healthcare System.

Critical Supply Shortages - The Need for Ventilators and Personal Protective Equipment during the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Abstract: Critical Supply Shortages U.S. hospitals are already reporting shortages of key equipment needed to care for critically ill patients with Covid-19, including ventilators and personal protective equ...

Use of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals.

Abstract: We surveyed all acute care hospitals that are members of the American Hospital Association for the presence of specific electronic-record functionalities. Using a definition of electronic health records based on expert consensus, we determined the proportion of hospitals that had such systems in their clinical areas. We also examined the relationship of adoption of electronic health records to specific hospital characteristics and factors that were reported to be barriers to or facilitators of adoption. Results On the basis of responses from 63.1% of hospitals surveyed, only 1.5% of U.S. hospitals have a comprehensive electronic-records system (i.e., present in all clinical units), and an additional 7.6% have a basic system (i.e., present in at least one clinical unit). Computerized provider-order entry for medications has been implemented in only 17% of hospitals. Larger hospitals, those located in urban areas, and teaching hospitals were more likely to have electronic-records systems. Respondents cited capital requirements and high maintenance costs as the primary barriers to implementation, although hospitals with electronic-records systems were less likely to cite these barriers than hospitals without such systems. Conclusions The very low levels of adoption of electronic health records in U.S. hospitals suggest that policymakers face substantial obstacles to the achievement of health care performance goals that depend on health information technology. A policy strategy focused on financial support, interoperability, and training of technical support staff may be necessary to spur adoption of electronic-records systems in U.S. hospitals.

Electronic Health Records in Ambulatory Care — A National Survey of Physicians

Abstract: BACKGROUND Electronic health records have the potential to improve the delivery of health care services. However, in the United States, physicians have been slow to adopt such systems. This study assessed physicians' adoption of outpatient electronic health records, their satisfaction with such systems, the perceived effect of the systems on the quality of care, and the perceived barriers to adoption. METHODS In late 2007 and early 2008, we conducted a national survey of 2758 physicians, which represented a response rate of 62%. Using a definition for electronic health records that was based on expert consensus, we determined the proportion of physicians who were using such records in an office setting and the relationship between adoption and the characteristics of individual physicians and their practices. RESULTS Four percent of physicians reported having an extensive, fully functional electronic-records system, and 13% reported having a basic system. In multivariate analyses, primary care physicians and those practicing in large groups, in hospitals or medical centers, and in the western region of the United States were more likely to use electronic health records. Physicians reported positive effects of these systems on several dimensions of quality of care and high levels of satisfaction. Financial barriers were viewed as having the greatest effect on decisions about the adoption of electronic health records. CONCLUSIONS Physicians who use electronic health records believe such systems improve the quality of care and are generally satisfied with the systems. However, as of early 2008, electronic systems had been adopted by only a small minority of U.S. physicians, who may differ from later adopters of these systems.

Health Care Spending in the United States and Other High-Income Countries

Abstract: Importance Health care spending in the United States is a major concern and is higher than in other high-income countries, but there is little evidence that efforts to reform US health care delivery have had a meaningful influence on controlling health care spending and costs. Objective To compare potential drivers of spending, such as structural capacity and utilization, in the United States with those of 10 of the highest-income countries (United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, Australia, Japan, Sweden, France, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Denmark) to gain insight into what the United States can learn from these nations. Evidence Analysis of data primarily from 2013-2016 from key international organizations including the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), comparing underlying differences in structural features, types of health care and social spending, and performance between the United States and 10 high-income countries. When data were not available for a given country or more accurate country-level estimates were available from sources other than the OECD, country-specific data sources were used. Findings In 2016, the US spent 17.8% of its gross domestic product on health care, and spending in the other countries ranged from 9.6% (Australia) to 12.4% (Switzerland). The proportion of the population with health insurance was 90% in the US, lower than the other countries (range, 99%-100%), and the US had the highest proportion of private health insurance (55.3%). For some determinants of health such as smoking, the US ranked second lowest of the countries (11.4% of the US population ≥15 years smokes daily; mean of all 11 countries, 16.6%), but the US had the highest percentage of adults who were overweight or obese at 70.1% (range for other countries, 23.8%-63.4%; mean of all 11 countries, 55.6%). Life expectancy in the US was the lowest of the 11 countries at 78.8 years (range for other countries, 80.7-83.9 years; mean of all 11 countries, 81.7 years), and infant mortality was the highest (5.8 deaths per 1000 live births in the US; 3.6 per 1000 for all 11 countries). The US did not differ substantially from the other countries in physician workforce (2.6 physicians per 1000; 43% primary care physicians), or nursing workforce (11.1 nurses per 1000). The US had comparable numbers of hospital beds (2.8 per 1000) but higher utilization of magnetic resonance imaging (118 per 1000) and computed tomography (245 per 1000) vs other countries. The US had similar rates of utilization (US discharges per 100 000 were 192 for acute myocardial infarction, 365 for pneumonia, 230 for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; procedures per 100 000 were 204 for hip replacement, 226 for knee replacement, and 79 for coronary artery bypass graft surgery). Administrative costs of care (activities relating to planning, regulating, and managing health systems and services) accounted for 8% in the US vs a range of 1% to 3% in the other countries. For pharmaceutical costs, spending per capita was $1443 in the US vs a range of $466 to $939 in other countries. Salaries of physicians and nurses were higher in the US; for example, generalist physicians salaries were $218 173 in the US compared with a range of $86 607 to $154 126 in the other countries. Conclusions and Relevance The United States spent approximately twice as much as other high-income countries on medical care, yet utilization rates in the United States were largely similar to those in other nations. Prices of labor and goods, including pharmaceuticals, and administrative costs appeared to be the major drivers of the difference in overall cost between the United States and other high-income countries. As patients, physicians, policy makers, and legislators actively debate the future of the US health system, data such as these are needed to inform policy decisions.

Patients' Perception of Hospital Care in the United States

Abstract: BACKGROUND Patients' perceptions of their care, especially in the hospital setting, are not well known. Data from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey provide a portrait of patients' experiences in U.S. hospitals. METHODS We assessed the performance of hospitals across multiple domains of patients' experiences. We examined whether key characteristics of hospitals that are thought to enhance patients' experiences (i.e., a high ratio of nurses to patient-days, for-profit status, and nonacademic status) were associated with a better experience for patients. We also examined whether a hospital's performance on the HCAHPS survey was related to its performance on indicators of the quality of clinical care. RESULTS We found moderately high levels of satisfaction with care (e.g., on average, 67.4% of a hospital's patients said that they would definitely recommend the hospital), with a high degree of correlation among the measures of patients' experiences (Cronbach's alpha, 0.94). As compared with hospitals in the bottom quartile of the ratio of nurses to patient-days, those in the top quartile had a somewhat better performance on the HCAHPS survey (e.g., 63.5% vs. 70.2% of patients responded that they "would definitely recommend" the hospital; P<0.001). Hospitals with a high level of patient satisfaction provided clinical care that was somewhat higher in quality for all conditions examined. For example, those in the top quartile of HCAHPS ratings performed better than those in the bottom quartile with respect to the care that patients received for acute myocardial infarction (actions taken to provide appropriate care as a proportion of all opportunities for providing such actions, 95.8% vs. 93.1% in unadjusted analyses; P<0.001) and for pneumonia (90.5% vs. 88.6% in unadjusted analyses, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS This portrait of patients' experiences in U.S. hospitals offers insights into areas that need improvement, suggests that the same characteristics of hospitals that lead to high nurse-staffing levels may be associated with better experiences for patients, and offers evidence that hospitals can provide both a high quality of clinical care and a good experience for the patient.

Cancer statistics, 2010

Abstract: Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the number of new cancer cases and deaths expected in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data regarding cancer incidence, mortality, and survival based on incidence data from the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries and mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Incidence and death rates are age-standardized to the 2000 US standard million population. A total of 1,529,560 new cancer cases and 569,490 deaths from cancer are projected to occur in the United States in 2010. Overall cancer incidence rates decreased in the most recent time period in both men (1.3% per year from 2000 to 2006) and women (0.5% per year from 1998 to 2006), largely due to decreases in the 3 major cancer sites in men (lung, prostate, and colon and rectum [colorectum]) and 2 major cancer sites in women (breast and colorectum). This decrease occurred in all racial/ethnic groups in both men and women with the exception of American Indian/Alaska Native women, in whom rates were stable. Among men, death rates for all races combined decreased by 21.0% between 1990 and 2006, with decreases in lung, prostate, and colorectal cancer rates accounting for nearly 80% of the total decrease. Among women, overall cancer death rates between 1991 and 2006 decreased by 12.3%, with decreases in breast and colorectal cancer rates accounting for 60% of the total decrease. The reduction in the overall cancer death rates translates to the avoidance of approximately 767,000 deaths from cancer over the 16-year period. This report also examines cancer incidence, mortality, and survival by site, sex, race/ethnicity, geographic area, and calendar year. Although progress has been made in reducing incidence and mortality rates and improving survival, cancer still accounts for more deaths than heart disease in persons younger than 85 years. Further progress can be accelerated by applying existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population and by supporting new discoveries in cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment. CA Cancer J Clin 2010;60:277-300. © 2010 American Cancer Society, Inc.

Cancer Statistics, 2009

Abstract: Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the number of new cancer cases and deaths expected in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival based on incidence data from the National Cancer Institute, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries and mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Incidence and death rates are standardized by age to the 2000 United States standard million population. A total of 1,479,350 new cancer cases and 562,340 deaths from cancer are projected to occur in the United States in 2009. Overall cancer incidence rates decreased in the most recent time period in both men (1.8% per year from 2001 to 2005) and women (0.6% per year from 1998 to 2005), largely because of decreases in the three major cancer sites in men (lung, prostate, and colon and rectum [colorectum]) and in two major cancer sites in women (breast and colorectum). Overall cancer death rates decreased in men by 19.2% between 1990 and 2005, with decreases in lung (37%), prostate (24%), and colorectal (17%) cancer rates accounting for nearly 80% of the total decrease. Among women, overall cancer death rates between 1991 and 2005 decreased by 11.4%, with decreases in breast (37%) and colorectal (24%) cancer rates accounting for 60% of the total decrease. The reduction in the overall cancer death rates has resulted in the avoidance of about 650,000 deaths from cancer over the 15-year period. This report also examines cancer incidence, mortality, and survival by site, sex, race/ethnicity, education, geographic area, and calendar year. Although progress has been made in reducing incidence and mortality rates and improving survival, cancer still accounts for more deaths than heart disease in persons younger than 85 years of age. Further progress can be accelerated by applying existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population and by supporting new discoveries in cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2010 Update A Report From the American Heart Association

Abstract: Appendix I: List of Statistical Fact Sheets. URL: http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=2007 We wish to thank Drs Brian Eigel and Michael Wolz for their valuable comments and contributions. We would like to acknowledge Tim Anderson and Tom Schneider for their editorial contributions and Karen Modesitt for her administrative assistance. Disclosures View this table: View this table: View this table: # Summary {#article-title-2} Each year, the American Heart Association, in conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and other government agencies, brings together the most up-to-date statistics on heart disease, stroke, other vascular diseases, and their risk factors and presents them in its Heart Disease and Stroke Statistical Update. The Statistical Update is a valuable resource for researchers, clinicians, healthcare policy makers, media professionals, the lay public, and many others who seek the best national data available on disease …

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2013 Update A Report From the American Heart Association

Abstract: Author(s): Go, Alan S; Mozaffarian, Dariush; Roger, Veronique L; Benjamin, Emelia J; Berry, Jarett D; Borden, William B; Bravata, Dawn M; Dai, Shifan; Ford, Earl S; Fox, Caroline S; Franco, Sheila; Fullerton, Heather J; Gillespie, Cathleen; Hailpern, Susan M; Heit, John A; Howard, Virginia J; Huffman, Mark D; Kissela, Brett M; Kittner, Steven J; Lackland, Daniel T; Lichtman, Judith H; Lisabeth, Lynda D; Magid, David; Marcus, Gregory M; Marelli, Ariane; Matchar, David B; McGuire, Darren K; Mohler, Emile R; Moy, Claudia S; Mussolino, Michael E; Nichol, Graham; Paynter, Nina P; Schreiner, Pamela J; Sorlie, Paul D; Stein, Joel; Turan, Tanya N; Virani, Salim S; Wong, Nathan D; Woo, Daniel; Turner, Melanie B; American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee