This study examined differences in patient outcomes between Magnet hospitals and non-Magnet hospitals, and the extent to which organizational nursing characteristics can explain any differences. The study found that Magnet hospitals had better patient outcomes, with 21% lower mortality and 20% lower failure to rescue rates. Some of these differences can be attributed to Magnet hospitals having better organizational nursing characteristics like staffing and work environments. However, there remains a residual benefit of Magnet status that is not fully explained by measurable nursing factors alone.

2. Magnet hospitals demonstrate 21% lower mortality and 20% lower failure to rescue rates than non-Magnet hospitals (Table 2).

3. When controlling for organizational nursing characteristics, the Magnet effect decreases for patient mortality (p=0.03) and failure-to-rescue (p=0.08) (Table 2, Model III)

4. Being treated in a Magnet hospital is associated with better outcomes for surgical patients.

5. Outcome differences between Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals can be attributed to a hospital’s organization of nursing care.

6. There is, however, some residual benefit of Magnet-status not accounted for by the nursing factors measured.

7. Secondary analysis of a 2006 four state survey of nursing characteristics, state hospital discharge databases, and the American Hospital Association Annual Survey dataset.

8. Sample included 27,043 nurses, 632,573 patients, and 521 acute care hospitals in four states: CA, FL, NJ, and PA.

9. Organizational nursing characteristics (Table 1) were used to create a propensity score for each hospital to represent the likelihood of the hospital being Magnet credentialed.

10. Mortality and failure to rescue outcomes were analyzed between Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals, as well as the effect of Magnet hospital status controlling for organizational nursing characteristics.

11. Background. Despite a growing body of knowledge on the benefits of Magnet designation, few studies have been able to demonstrate better patient outcomes in Magnet hospitals.

12. Objectives. The purpose of this study was to determine whether differences exist in patient outcomes between Magnet credentialed hospitals compared to non-Magnet hospitals.

13. Methods. Using a 4 state survey of 27,043 nurses, we tested the effect of Magnet-hospital status on surgical mortality and failure-to-rescue outcomes, as well as the effect of Magnet-hospital status when controlling for organizational nursing features represented by a propensity score.

14. Results. Being cared for in a Magnet hospital was associated with better patient outcomes.

16. Few studies have demonstrated better patient outcomes in Magnet hospitals, and have been limited in explaining the role of organizational nursing characteristics in the effect on patient outcomes. Objectives The objective of this study is to determine whether differences exist in patient outcomes in Magnet credentialed hospitals, and to what extent differences can be explained by hospital organizational nursing characteristics. Patient Outcomes in Magnet Hospitals Lesly A. Kelly, Matthew D. McHugh, Evan Wu, Herbert L. Smith, and Linda H. Aiken Center for Health Outcomes and Policy Research Table 2: Mortality & Failure to Rescue in Magnet & Non-Magnet Hospitals Table 1: Characteristics of Magnet & Non-Magnet Hospitals