The effect of integration of hospitals and post-acute care providers on Medicare payment and patient outcomes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Konetzka RT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6081263 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The effect of integration of hospitals and post-acute care providers on Medicare payment and patient outcomes.
Konetzka R Tamara RT Stuart Elizabeth A EA Werner Rachel M RM
Journal of health economics 20180207
In this paper we examine empirically the effect of integration on Medicare payment and rehospitalization. We use 2005-2013 data on Medicare beneficiaries receiving post-acute care (PAC) in the U.S. to examine integration between hospitals and the two most common post-acute care settings: skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and home health agencies (HHA), using two measures of integration-formal vertical integration and informal integration representing preferential relationships between providers ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:To understand the impacts of Medicare payment reform on the entry and exit of post-acute providers.Medicare Provider of Services data, Cost Reports, and Census data from 1991 through 2010.We examined market-level changes in entry and exit after payment reforms relative to a preexisting time trend. We also compared changes in high Medicare share markets relative to lower Medicare share markets and for freestanding relative to hospital-based facilities.We calculated market-level entry, exit, and total stock of home health agencies, skilled nursing facilities, and inpatient rehabilitation facilities from Provider of Services files between 1992 and 2010. We linked these measures with demographic information from the Census and American Community Survey, information on Certificate of Need laws, and Medicare share of facilities in each market drawn from Cost Report data.Payment reforms reducing average and marginal payments reduced entries and increased exits from the market. Entry effects were larger and more persistent than exit effects. Entry and exit rates fluctuated more for home health agencies than skilled nursing facilities. Effects on number of providers were consistent with entry and exit effects.Payment reform affects market entry and exit, which in turn may affect market structure, access to care, quality and cost of care, and patient outcomes. Policy makers should consider potential impacts of payment reforms on post-acute care market structure when implementing these reforms.
| S-EPMC3796101 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the long-term impact of Medicare payment reductions on patient outcomes for Medicare acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients.Data sourcesAnalysis of secondary data compiled from 100 percent Medicare Provider Analysis and Review between 1995 and 2005, Medicare hospital cost reports, Inpatient Prospective Payment System Payment Impact Files, American Hospital Association annual surveys, InterStudy, Area Resource Files, and County Business Patterns.Study designWe used a natural experiment-the Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997-as an instrument to predict cumulative Medicare revenue loss due solely to the BBA, and basing on the predicted loss categorized hospitals into small, moderate, or large payment-cut groups and followed Medicare AMI patient outcomes in these hospitals over an 11-year panel between 1995 and 2005.Principal findingsWe found that while Medicare AMI mortality trends remained similar across hospitals between pre-BBA and initial-BBA periods, hospitals facing large payment cuts saw smaller improvement in mortality rates relative to that of hospitals facing small cuts in the post-BBA period. Part of the relatively higher AMI mortalities among large-cut hospitals might be related to reductions in staffing levels and operating costs, and a small part might be due to patient selection.ConclusionsWe found evidence that hospitals facing large Medicare payment cuts as a result of BBA of 1997 were associated with deteriorating patient outcomes in the long run. Medicare payment reductions may have an unintended consequence of widening the gap in quality across hospitals.
| S-EPMC4213051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesPeritoneal dialysis (PD) use increased in the United States with the introduction of a new Medicare prospective payment system in January 2011 that likely reduced financial disincentives for facility use of this home therapy. The expansion of PD to a broader population and facilities having less PD experience may have implications for patient outcomes. We assessed the impact of PD expansion on PD discontinuation and patient mortality.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsA prospective cohort study was conducted of patients treated with PD at 90 days of ESKD. Patients were grouped by study start date relative to the Medicare payment reform: prereform (July 1, 2008 to December 31, 2009; n=10,585), interim (January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010; n=7832), and reform period (January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012; n=18,742). Patient characteristics and facility PD experience were compared at baseline (day 91 of ESKD). Patients were followed for 3 years for the major outcomes of PD discontinuation and mortality using Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsPatient characteristics, including age, sex, race, ethnicity, rurality, cause of ESKD, and comorbidity, were similar or showed small changes across the three study periods. There was an increasing tendency for patients on PD to be treated in facilities with less PD experience (from 34% during the prereform period being treated in facilities averaging <14 patients on PD per year to 44% in the reform period). Patients treated in facilities with less PD experience had a higher rate of PD discontinuation than patients treated in facilities with the most experience (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.10 to 1.23 for the first versus fifth quintile of PD experience). Nevertheless, the risk of PD discontinuation fell during the late interim period (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.95) and most of the reform period (from HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.91 to HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.01). Mortality risk was stable across the three study periods.ConclusionsIn the context of expanding PD use and declining facility PD experience, the risk of PD discontinuation fell, and there was no adverse effect on mortality.PodcastThis article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2019_09_12_CJN01610219.mp3.
| S-EPMC6777599 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceMedicare's Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model rewards or penalizes hospitals on the basis of meeting spending benchmarks that do not account for patients' preexisting social and medical complexity or high expenses associated with serving disadvantaged populations such as dual-eligible patients (ie, those enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid). The CJR model may have different implications for hospitals serving a high percentage of dual-eligible patients (termed high-dual) and hospitals serving a low percentage of dual-eligible patients (termed low-dual).ObjectiveTo examine changes associated with the CJR model among high-dual or low-dual hospitals in 2016 to 2017.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study comprised 3 analyses of high-dual or low-dual hospitals (n = 1165) serving patients with hip or knee joint replacements (n = 768 224) in 67 treatment metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) selected for CJR participation and 103 control MSAs. The study used Medicare claims data and public reports from 2012 to 2017. Data analysis was conducted from February 1, 2019, to August 31, 2019.ExposuresThe CJR model holds participating hospitals accountable for the spending and quality of care during care episodes for patients with hip or knee joint replacement, including hospitalization and 90 days after discharge.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were total episode spending, discharge to institutional postacute care facility, and readmission within the 90-day postdischarge period; bonus and penalty payments for each hospital; and reductions in per-episode spending required to receive a bonus for each hospital.ResultsIn total, 1165 hospitals (291 high-dual and 874 low-dual) and 768 224 patients with joint replacement (494 013 women [64.3%]; mean [SD] age, 76 [7] years) were included. An episode-level triple-difference analysis indicated that total spending under the CJR model decreased at high-dual hospitals (by $851; 95% CI, -$1556 to -$146; P = .02) and low-dual hospitals (by $567; 95% CI, -$933 to -$202; P = .003). The size of decreases did not differ between the 2 groups (difference, -$284; 95% CI, -$981 to $413; P = .42). Discharge to institutional postacute care settings and readmission did not change among both hospital groups. High-dual hospitals were less likely to receive a bonus compared with low-dual hospitals (40.3% vs 59.1% in 2016; 56.9% vs 76.0% in 2017). To receive a bonus, high-dual hospitals would be required to reduce spending by $887 to $2231 per episode, compared with only $89 to $215 for low-dual hospitals.Conclusions and relevanceThe study found that high- and low-dual hospitals made changes in care after CJR implementation, and the magnitude of these changes did not differ between the 2 groups. However, high-dual hospitals were less likely to receive a bonus for spending cuts. Spending benchmarks for CJR would require high-dual hospitals to reduce spending more substantially to receive a financial incentive.
| S-EPMC6865278 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A goal of Medicare's bundled payment models is to improve quality and control costs after hospital discharge. Little is known about how participating hospitals are focusing their efforts to achieve these objectives, particularly around the use of skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). To understand hospitals' approaches, we conducted semistructured interviews with an executive or administrator in each of twenty-two hospitals and health systems participating in Medicare's Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model or its Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative for lower extremity joint replacement episodes. We identified two major organizational responses. One principal strategy was to reduce SNF referrals, using risk-stratification tools, patient education, home care supports, and linkages with home health agencies to facilitate discharges to home. Another was to enhance integration with SNFs: fifteen hospitals or health systems in our sample had formed networks of preferred SNFs to exert influence over SNF quality and costs. Common coordination strategies included sharing access to electronic medical records, embedding providers across facilities, hiring dedicated care coordination staff, and creating platforms for data sharing. As hospitals presumably move toward home-based care and more selective SNF referrals, more evidence is needed to understand how these discharge practices affect the quality of care and patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC6345271 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo test how the implementation of new Medicare post-acute payment systems affected the use of inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), and home health agencies.Data sourcesMedicare acute hospital, IRF, and SNF claims; provider of services file; enrollment file; and Area Resource File data.Study designWe used multinomial logit models to measure realized access to post-acute care and to predict how access to alternative sites of care changed in response to prospective payment systems.Data extraction methodsA file was constructed linking data for elderly Medicare patients discharged from acute care facilities between 1996 and 2003 with a diagnosis of hip fracture, stroke, or lower extremity joint replacement.Principal findingsAlthough the effects of the payment systems on the use of post-acute care varied, most reduced the use of the site of care they directly affected and boosted the use of alternative sites of care. Payment system changes do not appear to have differentially affected the severely ill.ConclusionsPayment system incentives play a significant role in determining where Medicare beneficiaries receive their post-acute care. Changing these incentives results in shifting of patients between post-acute sites.
| S-EPMC2739024 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:While early evidence suggests that Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs) may reduce post-acute care (PAC) utilization for attributed beneficiaries, whether these effects spill over to all beneficiaries admitted to hospitals participating in ACOs stray is unknown. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to evaluate whether changes in PAC use and Medicare spending spill over to all beneficiaries admitted to hospitals participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). DESIGN:Observational study using a difference-in-differences design comparing changes in PAC utilization and spending among beneficiaries admitted to ACO-participating hospitals before and after the start of the ACO contracts, compared to those admitted to non-ACO hospitals. SETTING:A total of 233 hospitals participate in MSSP ACOs and 3103 non-ACO hospitals. PARTICIPANTS:A national sample of 11,683,573 Medicare beneficiaries experiencing 26,503,086 hospital admissions from 2010 to 2013. EXPOSURE:Admission to a hospital participating in an MSSP ACO. MAIN MEASURES:The probability of discharge and Medicare payments to inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRF), skilled nursing facilities (SNF), and home health agencies (HHA). KEY RESULTS:For beneficiaries admitted to hospitals that joined an ACO, the likelihood of being discharged to PAC did not change after the hospital joined the ACO compared with non-ACO hospitals over the same period (differential change in probability of discharge to any PAC was 0.000 (P?=?0.89), SNF was 0.000 (P?=?0.73), IRF was 0.000 (P?=?0.96), and HHA was 0.001 (P?=?0.57)). Payments reduced significantly for PAC overall (-?$130.41, P?=?0.03), but not for any individual PAC type alone. These results were consistent in samples that were conditional on discharge to any PAC, across conditions with high PAC use nationally, and among ACO-participating hospitals that also had a PAC participant. CONCLUSIONS:Hospital participation in an ACO did not result in spillovers in PAC utilization or payments to all beneficiaries, even when considering high PAC-use conditions and ACO hospitals that also have an ACO-participating PAC.
| S-EPMC5975159 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient utilization of public reporting has been suboptimal despite attempts to encourage use. Lack of utilization may be due to discordance between reported metrics and what patients want to know when making health care choices.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to identify measures of quality that individuals want to be presented in public reporting and explore factors associated with researching health care.Research designPatient interviews and focus groups were conducted to develop a survey exploring the relative importance of various health care measures.SubjectsInterviews and focus groups conducted at local outpatient clinics. A survey administered nationally on an anonymous digital platform.MeasuresLikert scale responses were compared using tests of central tendency. Rank-order responses were compared using analysis of variance testing. Associations with binary outcomes were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression.ResultsOverall, 4672 responses were received (42.0% response rate). Census balancing yielded 2004 surveys for analysis. Measures identified as most important were hospital reputation (considered important by 61.9%), physician experience (51.5%), and primary care recommendations (43.2%). Unimportant factors included guideline adherence (17.6%) and hospital academic affiliation (13.3%, P<0.001 for all compared with most important factors). Morbidity and mortality outcome measures were not among the most important factors. Patients were unlikely to rank outcome measures as the most important factors in choosing health care providers, irrespective of age, sex, educational status, or income.ConclusionsPatients valued hospital reputation, physician experience, and primary care recommendations while publicly reported metrics like patient outcomes were less important. Public quality reports contain information that patients perceive to be of relatively low value, which may contribute to low utilization.
| S-EPMC7492361 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe aim of this review was to synthesize the best available evidence on the impact of nurses' safety attitudes on patient outcomes in acute-care hospitals.DesignSystematic review with a narrative synthesis of the available data.Data sourcesData sources included MEDLINE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection. Studies published up to March 2021 were included.Review methodsThis review was conducted using guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute for Systematic Reviews and reported as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines.ResultsA total of 3,452 studies were identified, and nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Nurses with positive safety attitudes reported fewer patient falls, medication errors, pressure injuries, healthcare-associated infections, mortality, physical restraints, vascular access device reactions and higher patient satisfaction. Effective teamwork led to a reduction in adverse patient outcomes. Most included studies (N = 6) used variants of the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture to assess nurses' safety attitudes. Patient outcomes data were collected from four sources: coded medical records data, incident management systems, nurse perceptions of adverse events and patient perceptions of safety.ConclusionA positive safety culture in nursing units and across hospitals resulted in fewer reported adverse patient outcomes. Nurse managers can improve nurses' safety attitudes by promoting a non-punitive response to error reporting and promoting effective teamwork and good communication.
| S-EPMC8685891 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To examine relationships between penalties assessed by Medicare's Hospital Readmission Reduction Program and Value-Based Purchasing Program and hospital financial condition. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING:Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, American Hospital Association, and Area Health Resource File data for 4,824 hospital-year observations. STUDY DESIGN:Bivariate and multivariate analysis of pooled cross-sectional data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Safety net hospitals have significantly higher HRRP/VBP penalties, but, unlike nonsafety net hospitals, increases in their penalty rate did not significantly affect their total margins. CONCLUSIONS:Safety net hospitals appear to rely on nonpatient care revenues to offset higher penalties for the years studied. While reassuring, these funding streams are volatile and may not be able to compensate for cumulative losses over time.
| S-EPMC6153176 | biostudies-literature