Study: How does imaging utilization compare between Magnet hospitals, non-Magnet hospitals?

Hospitals are designated by the American Nurses Credentialing Center as either a Magnet hospital (MH) or non-Magnet hospital (NMH) based on a number of criteria. MHs are believed to be better at attracting and retaining high-quality nurses than NMHs, and there are currently less than 450 MHs in the U.S.

But how do MHs compare on imaging utilization? Jayani Jayawardhana, PhD, University of Georgia, and John M. Welton, PhD, University of Colorado-Anschutz Medical Campus, asked that very question in a study published in the special December issue of the Journal of the American College of Radiology (JACR).

“MHs are known for their high quality of patient care, excellence in nursing practices, higher retention rates for well-qualified nurses, improved outcomes of care, and greater propensity to use evidence-based care,” Jayawardhana and Welton wrote. “As part of obtaining MH designation, MHs make large investments in resources, including high-cost resources such as diagnostic imaging services. Given access to greater resources and capabilities, MHs may be more likely to utilize high-cost services such as diagnostic imaging services in comparison with NMHs.”

Using data from several organizations, the authors looked at both MHs and NMHs in 10 different states over a six-year period, comparing them in terms of the number of beds, severity of illness and technological sophistication.

Overall, MHs that are larger in size, serve patients with more severe conditions, and use more advanced technology show higher utilization of diagnostic imaging services than similar NMHs, the study found.

However, the authors added that it is too early to reach any definite conclusions about what this implies about MHs overall.

“Does the MH practice environment, especially the emphasis on evidence-based care, influence provider practice patterns?” Jayawardhana and Welton asked. “If there is a link between excellent nursing care, practice environment and imaging services, could there also be effects on other ancillary hospital services? Further study is needed to better understand the effects of MH designation on the utilization of diagnostic imaging services and other essential hospital services.”

In addition, MHs that are larger in size, serve patients with more severe conditions, and use more advanced technology have lower costs per procedure than similar NMHs.

The authors noted that this could potentially be because those working at MHs are more efficient, but again, further study is needed.  

To view the full study, readers can take advantage of this special open-access issue of the JACR at the publication’s website.