Internet Explorer 11 is not supported

For optimal browsing, we recommend Chrome, Firefox or Safari browsers.

Voters Overwhelmingly Reject Patient Limits for Nurses

Massachusetts would have been the second state with nurse-to-patient ratio requirements.

A male nurse with an elderly patient.
(TNS/Gina Ferazzi)
For results of the most important ballot measures, click here.

Voters in Massachusetts handily struck down a limit on the number of patients that hospital nurses can help at one time. With just 14 percent of precincts reporting, the measure was defeated 70 percent to 30 percent, according to The Boston Globe. It would have been only the second state in the country with nurse-to-patient ratio requirements.

Question 1 would have created legal ratios based on the type of patients that nurses are dealing with. Nurses aiding women during birth and up to two hours after, for instance, would have been limited to one patient. If they were working with children, they could have seen four patients at once. In the psychiatric ward, nurses could have helped up to five patients.

It was one of the more controversial measures on the Massachusetts ballot this year. While nurses unions and progressive political groups backed the ballot measure, most medical groups -- including the Massachusetts chapter of the American Nurses Association and the state's Health and Hospital Association -- opposed it. Republican Gov. Charlie Baker also opposed the measure.

The ballot measure's supporters argued that not regulating this negatively impacts patient care and overall health outcomes.

“There is overwhelming evidence when you look at studies and talk to nurses that when there are limits, there are better health outcomes,” said Kate Norton, campaign spokewoman for the Committee to Ensure Safe Patient Care, which was the official campaign for Question 2.

Opponents of the measure argued that it would have worsened the existing nurse shortage there. Right now the vacancy rate for registered nurses in Massachusetts hospitals is 6.4 percent. 

“If it passes, the estimates are that hospitals will have to hire 6,000 more nurses [according to a study led by the opposition camp]. Where will they get them?” said Jake Krilovich, director of policy and public affairs for the Home Care Alliance of Massachusetts, which opposed the measure.

But according to data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the state is projected to have a surplus of nurses by 2030. 

Though supporters outspent opponents early in the campaign, opposition groups -- led by the Massachusetts Health and Hospital Association -- raised $26 million to fight the initiative. 

Seven states have laws that require hospitals to have committees that address staffing issues, but California is the only state with a cap on the number of patients a nurse can see during one shift. A 2011 study in the journal Health Affairs found that nurse-patient ratios in California resulted in decreased mortality rates after surgery and an additional half-hour of care for patients overall. Advocates have struggled to gain support for ratio laws elsewhere, in part because the hospital industry doesn't believe there's enough evidence to support them.

California's regulations were drafted by the state’s department of health and have been in effect since 2004. There was some fear at the time that hospitals would be forced to hire more nurses with less education in order to comply with the ratios. But according to the 2011 study, that didn't happen.

Opponents of Massachusetts' measure also worried that it would have forced hospitals “to make deep cuts to critical programs, such as opioid treatment and mental health services. Many community hospitals will not be able to absorb the added cost and will be forced to close.” 

In California's experience, those fears are likely overblown. 

Research by the California Healthcare Foundation in 2009 shows that while “leaders reported difficulties in absorbing the costs of the ratios, and many had to reduce budgets, reduce services or employ other cost-saving measures,” the impact of the ratios was not discernible on hospital finances.

Research further shows that hiring levels only increased slightly after the mandate. But California is expected to have a nursing shortage of more than 44,000 by 2030. It's not clear how big a role, if any, the staffing ratios play in this shortage.

For results of the most important ballot measures, click here.

Mattie covers all things health for Governing.

Special Projects