Dataset Information

The Impact of Nursing Home Pay-for-Performance on Quality and Medicare Spending: Results from the Nursing Home Value-Based Purchasing Demonstration.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate the impact of the Nursing Home Value-Based Purchasing demonstration on quality of care and Medicare spending.

Data sources/study setting

Administrative and qualitative data from Arizona, New York, and Wisconsin nursing homes over the base-year (2008-2009) and 3-year (2009-2012) demonstration period.

Study design

Nursing homes were randomized to the intervention in New York, while the comparison facilities were constructed via propensity score matching in Arizona and Wisconsin. We used a difference-in-difference analysis to compare outcomes across the base-year relative to outcomes in each of the three demonstration years. To provide context and assist with interpretation of results, we also interviewed staff members at participating facilities.

Principal findings

Medicare savings were observed in Arizona in the first year only and Wisconsin for the first 2 years; no savings were observed in New York. The demonstration did not systematically impact any of the quality measures. Discussions with nursing home administrators suggested that facilities made few, if any, changes in response to the demonstration, leading us to conclude that the observed savings likely reflected regression to the mean rather than true savings.

Conclusion

The Federal nursing home pay-for-performance demonstration had little impact on quality or Medicare spending.

SUBMITTER: Grabowski DC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5517679 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Impact of Nursing Home Pay-for-Performance on Quality and Medicare Spending: Results from the Nursing Home Value-Based Purchasing Demonstration.

Grabowski David C DC Stevenson David G DG Caudry Daryl J DJ O'Malley A James AJ Green Lisa H LH Doherty Julia A JA Frank Richard G RG

Health services research 20160804 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the impact of the Nursing Home Value-Based Purchasing demonstration on quality of care and Medicare spending.<h4>Data sources/study setting</h4>Administrative and qualitative data from Arizona, New York, and Wisconsin nursing homes over the base-year (2008-2009) and 3-year (2009-2012) demonstration period.<h4>Study design</h4>Nursing homes were randomized to the intervention in New York, while the comparison facilities were constructed via propensity score matching ...[more]

PMID: 27491950

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe new Medicare Skilled Nursing Facility Value-Based Purchasing program (SNF VBP) seeks to improve patient outcomes by awarding financial incentives or penalties based on 30-day hospital readmission rates. Skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) can avoid a penalty through low baseline readmission rates or improvement over time.ObjectiveTo assess the baseline performance and improvement over time of SNFs in the SNF VBP program.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study examined readmission rates, financial penalties and incentives, and facility and patient characteristics associated with these outcomes at 14 959 US SNFs that received Medicare payments between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes were readmission rates and financial penalties by facility. The SNFs were classified as improvers in the analysis if they had better improvement scores than baseline scores under the program and achievers if they had higher baseline scores than improvement scores.ResultsOf 14 959 SNFs studied, 1849 (12.3%) were assigned their improvement score as their performance score in the first year of the program. Of these, 1167 (63.1%) received a financial penalty, whereas 374 (20.2%) received a bonus. Only 52 facilities that performed poorly at baseline (0.3% of all SNFs and 0.7% of below-median performers) were able to improve enough to avoid a financial penalty, despite large improvements in readmission rates. Improver SNFs treated larger racial minority populations (mean [SD], 74.57% [23.42%] White in the improver group vs 79.15% [22.18%] in the achiever group) and were located in counties with larger minority populations (mean [SD], 15.48% [14.05%] Black in the improver group vs 11.57% [12.72%] Black in the achiever group). The most important predictors of improvement were related to SNF finances, such as operating margin (mean [SD], -0.74 [13.87]) and occupancy rates (mean [SD], 79.93 [14.81]).Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study suggests that the SNF VBP program did not offer a viable path for nearly all low-performing SNFs to avoid financial penalties through improved readmission rates.

Project description:ContextThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently launched accountable care organization (ACO) programs designed to improve quality and slow cost growth. The ACOs resemble an earlier pilot, the Medicare Physician Group Practice Demonstration (PGPD), in which participating physician groups received bonus payments if they achieved lower cost growth than local controls and met quality targets. Although evidence indicates the PGPD improved quality, uncertainty remains about its effect on costs.ObjectiveTo estimate cost savings associated with the PGPD overall and for beneficiaries dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid.DesignQuasi-experimental analyses comparing preintervention (2001-2004) and postintervention (2005-2009) trends in spending of PGPD participants to local control groups. We compared estimates using several alternative approaches to adjust for case mix.SettingTen physician groups from across the United States.Patients and participantsThe intervention group was composed of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries (n = 990,177) receiving care primarily from the physicians in the participating medical groups. Controls were Medicare beneficiaries (n = 7,514,453) from the same regions who received care largely from non-PGPD physicians. Overall, 15% of beneficiaries were dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid.Main outcome measureAnnual spending per Medicare fee-for-service beneficiary.ResultsAnnual savings per beneficiary were modest overall (adjusted mean $114, 95% CI, $12-$216). Annual savings were significant in dually eligible beneficiaries (adjusted mean $532, 95% CI, $277-$786), but were not significant among nondually eligible beneficiaries (adjusted mean $59, 95% CI, $166 in savings to $47 in additional spending). The adjusted mean spending reductions were concentrated in acute care (overall, $118, 95% CI, $65-$170; dually eligible: $381, 95% CI, $247-$515; nondually eligible: $85, 95% CI, $32-$138). There was significant variation in savings across practice groups, ranging from an overall mean per-capita annual saving of $866 (95% CI, $815-$918) to an increase in expenditures of $749 (95% CI, $698-$799). Thirty-day medical readmissions decreased overall (-0.67%, 95% CI, -1.11% to -0.23%) and in the dually eligible (-1.07%, 95% CI, -1.73% to -0.41%), while surgical readmissions decreased only for the dually eligible (-2.21%, 95% CI, -3.07% to -1.34%). Estimates were sensitive to the risk-adjustment method.ConclusionsSubstantial PGPD savings achieved by some participating institutions were offset by a lack of saving at other participating institutions. Most of the savings were concentrated among dually eligible beneficiaries.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the impact of the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) program-the US pay for performance program introduced by Medicare to incentivize higher quality care-on 30 day mortality for three incentivized conditions: acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia.DesignObservational study.Setting4267 acute care hospitals in the United States: 2919 participated in the HVBP program and 1348 were ineligible and used as controls (44 in general hospitals in Maryland and 1304 critical access hospitals across the United States).Participants2 430 618 patients admitted to US hospitals from 2008 through 2013.Main outcome measures30 day risk adjusted mortality for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia using a patient level linear spline analysis to examine the association between the introduction of the HVBP program and 30 day mortality. Non-incentivized, medical conditions were the comparators. A secondary outcome measure was to determine whether the introduction of the HVBP program was particularly beneficial for a subgroup of hospital-poor performers at baseline-that may benefit the most.ResultsMortality rates of incentivized conditions in hospitals participating in the HVBP program declined at -0.13% for each quarter during the preintervention period and -0.03% point difference for each quarter during the post-intervention period. For non-HVBP hospitals, mortality rates declined at -0.14% point difference for each quarter during the preintervention period and -0.01% point difference for each quarter during the post-intervention period. The difference in the mortality trends between the two groups was small and non-significant (difference in difference in trends -0.03% point difference for each quarter, 95% confidence interval -0.08% to 0.13% point difference, P=0.35). In no subgroups of hospitals was HVBP associated with better outcomes, including poor performers at baseline.ConclusionsEvidence that HVBP has led to lower mortality rates is lacking. Nations considering similar pay for performance programs may want to consider alternative models to achieve improved patient outcomes.

Dataset Information

The Impact of Nursing Home Pay-for-Performance on Quality and Medicare Spending: Results from the Nursing Home Value-Based Purchasing Demonstration.

Objective

Data sources/study setting

Study design

Principal findings

Conclusion

Publications

The Impact of Nursing Home Pay-for-Performance on Quality and Medicare Spending: Results from the Nursing Home Value-Based Purchasing Demonstration.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets