Dataset Information

Impact of a health information exchange on resource use and Medicare-allowable reimbursements at 11 emergency departments in a midsized city.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Use clinician perceptions to estimate the impact of a health information exchange (HIE) on emergency department (ED) care at four major hospital systems (HS) within a region. Use survey data provided by ED clinicians to estimate reduction in Medicare-allowable reimbursements (MARs) resulting from use of an HIE.

Methods

We conducted the study during a one-year period beginning in February 2012. Study sites included eleven EDs operated by four major HS in the region of a mid-sized Southeastern city, including one academic ED, five community hospital EDs, four free-standing EDs and 1 ED/Chest Pain Center (CPC) all of which participated in an HIE. The study design was observational, prospective using a voluntary, anonymous, online survey. Eligible participants included attending emergency physicians, residents, and mid-level providers (PA & NP). Survey items asked clinicians whether information obtained from the HIE changed resource use while caring for patients at the study sites and used branching logic to ascertain specific types of services avoided including laboratory/microbiology, radiology, consultations, and hospital admissions. Additional items asked how use of the HIE affected quality of care and length of stay. The survey was automated using a survey construction tool (REDCap Survey Software © 2010 Vanderbilt University). We calculated avoided MARs by multiplying the numbers and types of services reported to have been avoided. Average cost of an admission from the ED was based on direct cost trends for ED admissions within the region.

Results

During the 12-month study period we had 325,740 patient encounters and 7,525 logons to the HIE (utilization rate of 2.3%) by 231 ED clinicians practicing at the study sites. We collected 621 surveys representing 8.25% of logons of which 532 (85.7% of surveys) reported on patients who had information available in the HIE. Within this group the following services and MARs were reported to have been avoided [type of service: number of services; MARs]: Laboratory/Microbiology:187; $2,073, Radiology: 298; $475,840, Consultations: 61; $6,461, Hospital Admissions: 56; $551,282. Grand total of MARs avoided: $1,035,654; average $1,947 per patient who had information available in the HIE (Range: $1,491 - $2,395 between HS). Changes in management other than avoidance of a service were reported by 32.2% of participants. Participants stated that quality of care was improved for 89% of patients with information in the HIE. Eighty-two percent of participants reported that valuable time was saved with a mean time saved of 105 minutes.

Conclusion

Observational data provided by ED clinicians practicing at eleven EDs in a mid-sized Southeastern city showed an average reduction in MARs of $1,947 per patient who had information available in an HIE. The majority of reduced MARs were due to avoided radiology studies and hospital admissions. Over 80% of participants reported that quality of care was improved and valuable time was saved.

SUBMITTER: Saef SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4251219 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of a health information exchange on resource use and Medicare-allowable reimbursements at 11 emergency departments in a midsized city.

Saef Steven H SH Melvin Cathy L CL Carr Christine M CM

The western journal of emergency medicine 20140919 7

<h4>Introduction</h4>Use clinician perceptions to estimate the impact of a health information exchange (HIE) on emergency department (ED) care at four major hospital systems (HS) within a region. Use survey data provided by ED clinicians to estimate reduction in Medicare-allowable reimbursements (MARs) resulting from use of an HIE.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted the study during a one-year period beginning in February 2012. Study sites included eleven EDs operated by four major HS in the region of ...[more]

PMID: 25493118

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAdvanced practice providers (APP), including physicians' assistants and nurse practitioners, have been increasingly incorporated into emergency department (ED) staffing over the past decade. There is scant literature examining resource utilization and the cost benefit of having APPs in the ED. The objectives of this study were to compare resource utilization in EDs that use APPs in their staffing model with those that do not and to estimate costs associated with the utilized resources.MethodsIn this five-year retrospective secondary data analysis of the Emergency Department Benchmarking Alliance (EDBA), we compared resource utilization rates in EDs with and without APPs in non-academic EDs. Primary outcomes were hospital admission and use of computed tomography (CT), radiography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Costs were estimated using the 2014 physician fee schedule and inpatient payments from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We measured outcomes as rates per 100 visits. Data were analyzed using a mixed linear model with repeated measures, adjusted for annual volume, patient acuity, and attending hours. We used the adjusted net difference to project utilization costs between the two groups per 1000 visits.ResultsOf the 1054 EDs included in this study, 79% employed APPs. Relative to EDs without APPs, EDs staffing APPs had higher resource utilization rates (use per 100 visits): 3.0 more admissions (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-4.1), 1.7 more CTs (95% CI, 0.2-3.1), 4.5 more radiographs (95% CI, 2.2-6.9), and 1.0 more ultrasound (95% CI, 0.3-1.7) but comparable MRI use 0.1 (95% CI, -0.2-0.3). Projected costs of these differences varied among the resource utilized. Compared to EDs without APPs, EDs with APPs were estimated to have 30.4 more admissions per 1000 visits, which could accrue $414,717 in utilization costs.ConclusionEDs staffing APPs were associated with modest increases in resource utilization as measured by admissions and imaging studies.

Project description:BackgroundMedication lists prepared in the emergency department (ED) form the basis for diagnosing and treating patients during hospitalization. Since incomplete medication information may lead to patient harm, it is crucial to obtain a correct and complete medication list at hospital admission. In this cross-sectional retrospective study we wanted to explore medication information completeness in admission notes from Norwegian EDs and investigate which factors were associated with level of completeness.MethodsMedication information was assessed for completeness by applying five evaluation criteria; generic name, formulation, dose, frequency, and indication for use. A medication completeness score in percent was calculated per medication, per admission note and per criterion. Quantile regression analysis was applied to investigate which variables were associated with medication information completeness.ResultsAdmission notes for patients admitted between October 2018 and September 2019 and using at least one medication were included. A total of 1,080 admission notes, containing 8,604 medication orders, were assessed. The individual medications had a mean medication completeness score of 88.1% (SD 16.4), while admission notes had a mean medication completeness score of 86.3% (SD 16.2). Over 90% of all individual medications had information about generic name, formulation, dose and frequency stated, while indication for use was only present in 60%. The use of an electronic tool to prepare medication information had a significantly strong positive association with completeness. Hospital visit within the last 30 days, the patient's living situation, number of medications in use, and which hospital the patient was admitted to, were also associated with information completeness.ConclusionsMedication information completeness in admission notes was high, but potential for improvement regarding documentation of indication for use was identified. Applying an electronic tool when preparing admission notes in EDs seems crucial to safeguard completeness of medication information.

Project description:ImportancePrevious assessments of practice patterns and reimbursements for female urologists relied on surveys or board certification logs. A current evaluation of the geographic distribution and practice patterns by female urologists would reveal contemporary patterns of access for Medicare beneficiaries.ObjectiveTo characterize the variation in practice patterns and reimbursements by urologist sex and the regional deficiencies in care provided by female urologists.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based cohort study used the publicly available Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Provider Payment database to evaluate payments for US urologists. The cohort (n = 8665) included urologists who provided and were paid for 11 or more services to Medicare beneficiaries in 2016. Data collection and analysis were performed from October 3, 2018, through June 19, 2019.Main outcomes and measuresProportion of female-specific services, payments per beneficiary, and payments per work relative value unit (wRVU) by urologist sex were assessed. Density of female urologists across hospital markets was also identified.ResultsAmong the 8665 urologists who received payments in 2016, 7944 (91.7%) were men and 721 (8.3%) were women. Female urologists, compared with male urologists, saw a lower proportion of patients with cancer (mean [SD], 16.3% [9.2%] vs 22.7% [8.8%]; P < .001) and a greater proportion of female Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD], 52.8% [23.2%] vs 24.4% [10.3%]; P < .001). Female urologists generated a greater proportion of wRVU from urodynamics (median [IQR], 2.88% [1.26%-4.84%] vs 1.07% [0.31%-2.26%]; P < .001) and gynecological operations (median [IQR], 0.68% [0.45%-1.07%] vs 0.41% [0.20%-0.81%]; P < .001) than male urologists. In addition, female urologists, compared with their male counterparts, received lower median payments per beneficiary seen ($70.12 [interquartile range (IQR), $60.00-$84.81] vs $72.37 [IQR, $59.63-$89.29]; P = .03) and lower payments per wRVU ($58.25 [IQR, $48.39-65.26] vs $60.04 [IQR, $51.93-$67.88]; P < .001). One-third (103 [33.7%]) of 306 hospital referral regions had 0 female urologists, and 80 (26.1%) had only 1 female urologist.Conclusions and relevanceFemale urologists were more likely to provide care for female Medicare beneficiaries, to receive lower payments per wRVU generated and beneficiaries seen, and to be difficult to access in certain geographic areas; these findings have policy-related implications and highlight the regional deficiencies in urological care and reimbursement discrepancies according to urologist sex.

Dataset Information

Impact of a health information exchange on resource use and Medicare-allowable reimbursements at 11 emergency departments in a midsized city.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Impact of a health information exchange on resource use and Medicare-allowable reimbursements at 11 emergency departments in a midsized city.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets