Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 12, 2026

Point-of-Care Ultrasound: A Review of Ultrasound Parameters for Predicting Difficult Airways
Published on: April 7, 2023
A systematic review of vertical integration and quality of care, efficiency, and patient-centered outcomes
Rachel M Machta1, Kristin A Maurer, David J Jones
1Rachel M. Machta, PhD, is Researcher, Mathematica Policy Research, Oakland, California. E-mail: RMachta@mathematica-mpr.com. Kristin A. Maurer, MPH, is Research Analyst, Mathematica Policy Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan. David J. Jones, PhD, is Associate Director, Mathematica Policy Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Michael F. Furukawa, PhD, is Senior Economist, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland. Eugene C. Rich, MD, is Senior Fellow, Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC.
Background:
Small independent practices are increasingly giving way to more complex affiliations between provider organizations and hospital systems. There are several ways in which vertically integrated health systems could improve quality and lower the costs of care. But there are also concerns that integrated systems may increase the price and costs of care without commensurate improvements in quality and outcomes.
Purpose:
Despite a growing body of research on vertically integrated health systems, no systematic review that we know of compares vertically integrated health systems (defined as shared ownership or joint management of hospitals and physician practices) to nonintegrated hospitals or physician practices.
Methods:
We conducted a systematic search of the literature published from January 1996 to November 2016. We considered articles for review if they compared the performance of a vertically integrated health system and examined an outcome related to quality of care, efficiency, or patient-centered outcomes.
Results:
Database searches generated 7,559 articles, with 29 articles included in this review. Vertical integration was associated with better quality, often measured as optimal care for specific conditions, but showed either no differences or lower efficiency as measured by utilization, spending, and prices. Few studies evaluated a patient-centered outcome; among those, most examined mortality and did not identify any effects. Across domains, most studies were observational and did not address the issue of selection bias.
Practice Implications:
Recent evidence suggests the trend toward vertical integration will likely continue as providers respond to changing payment models and market factors. A growing body of research on comparative health system performance suggests that integration of physician practices with hospitals might not be enough to achieve higher-value care. More information is needed to identify the health system attributes that contribute to improved outcomes, as well as which policy levers can minimize anticompetitive effects and maximize the benefits of these affiliations.
Related Concept Videos
Patient-centered Care
Specialized Care Centers and Settings-I
Daycare centers
They provide several functions. Some facilities care for healthy newborns and children whose parents work, while others are medically focused and care for...
Specialized Care Centers and Settings-II
Rural health centers are specialized care facilities in remote locations with very few medical personnel. The primary care providers who run the centers are mostly Registered Nurse Practitioners. Here, emergency treatment is provided to critically ill or injured patients before they are transferred to the closest hospital. Fortunately, due to advancement in technology, many rural healthcare facilities and professionals have easy access to diagnostic and treatment...
Applications of Integration to Find Centers of Mass
Lattice Centering and Coordination Number
Types of Unit Cells
Imagine taking a large number of identical...
Review and Preview
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...

