Dataset Information

Association of in-hospital resource utilization with post-acute spending in Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction: a cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Efforts to decrease hospitalization costs could increase post-acute care costs. This effect could undermine initiatives to reduce overall episode costs and have implications for the design of health care under alternative payment models.

Methods

Among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥65 years hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) between July 2010 and June 2013 in the Premier Healthcare Database, we studied the association of in-hospital and post-acute care resource utilization and outcomes by in-hospital cost tertiles.

Results

Among patients with AMI at 326 hospitals, the median (range) of each hospital's mean per-patient in-hospital risk-standardized cost (RSC) for the low, medium, and high cost tertiles were $16,257 ($13,097-$17,648), $18,544 ($17,663-$19,875), and $21,831 ($19,923-$31,296), respectively. There was no difference in the median (IQR) of risk-standardized post-acute payments across cost-tertiles: $5014 (4295-6051), $4980 (4349-5931) and $4922 (4056-5457) for the low (n = 90), medium (n = 98), and high (n = 86) in-hospital RSC tertiles (p = 0.21), respectively. In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates did not differ significantly across the in-hospital RSC tertiles; however, 30-day readmission rates were higher at hospitals with higher in-hospital RSCs: median = 17.5, 17.8, and 18.0% at low, medium, and high in-hospital RSC tertiles, respectively (p = 0.005 for test of trend across tertiles).

Conclusions

In our study of patients hospitalized with AMI, greater resource utilization during the hospitalization was not associated with meaningful differences in costs or mortality during the post-acute period. These findings suggest that it may be possible for higher cost hospitals to improve efficiency in care without increasing post-acute care utilization or worsening outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Nuti SV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6432744 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) has been associated with a reduction in readmission rates for heart failure (HF), acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and pneumonia. It is unclear whether the HRRP has been associated with change in patient mortality.ObjectiveTo determine whether the HRRP was associated with a change in patient mortality.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study of hospitalizations for HF, AMI, and pneumonia among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged at least 65 years across 4 periods from April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2015. Period 1 and period 2 occurred before the HRRP to establish baseline trends (April 2005-September 2007 and October 2007-March 2010). Period 3 and period 4 were after HRRP announcement (April 2010 to September 2012) and HRRP implementation (October 2012 to March 2015).ExposuresAnnouncement and implementation of the HRRP.Main outcomes and measuresInverse probability-weighted mortality within 30 days of discharge following hospitalization for HF, AMI, and pneumonia, and stratified by whether there was an associated readmission. An additional end point was mortality within 45 days of initial hospital admission for target conditions.ResultsThe study cohort included 8.3 million hospitalizations for HF, AMI, and pneumonia, among which 7.9 million (mean age, 79.6 [8.7] years; 53.4% women) were alive at discharge. There were 3.2 million hospitalizations for HF, 1.8 million for AMI, and 3.0 million for pneumonia. There were 270 517 deaths within 30 days of discharge for HF, 128 088 for AMI, and 246 154 for pneumonia. Among patients with HF, 30-day postdischarge mortality increased before the announcement of the HRRP (0.27% increase from period 1 to period 2). Compared with this baseline trend, HRRP announcement (0.49% increase from period 2 to period 3; difference in change, 0.22%, P = .01) and implementation (0.52% increase from period 3 to period 4; difference in change, 0.25%, P = .001) were significantly associated with an increase in postdischarge mortality. Among patients with AMI, HRRP announcement was associated with a decline in postdischarge mortality (0.18% pre-HRRP increase vs 0.08% post-HRRP announcement decrease; difference in change, -0.26%; P = .01) and did not significantly change after HRRP implementation. Among patients with pneumonia, postdischarge mortality was stable before HRRP (0.04% increase from period 1 to period 2), but significantly increased after HRRP announcement (0.26% post-HRRP announcement increase; difference in change, 0.22%, P = .01) and implementation (0.44% post-HPPR implementation increase; difference in change, 0.40%, P < .001). The overall increase in mortality among patients with HF and pneumonia was mainly related to outcomes among patients who were not readmitted but died within 30 days of discharge. For all 3 conditions, HRRP implementation was not significantly associated with an increase in mortality within 45 days of admission, relative to pre-HRRP trends.Conclusions and relevanceAmong Medicare beneficiaries, the HRRP was significantly associated with an increase in 30-day postdischarge mortality after hospitalization for HF and pneumonia, but not for AMI. Given the study design and the lack of significant association of the HRRP with mortality within 45 days of admission, further research is needed to understand whether the increase in 30-day postdischarge mortality is a result of the policy.

Project description:ContextPublic reporting of patient outcomes is an important tool to improve quality of care, but some observers worry that such efforts will lead clinicians to avoid high-risk patients.ObjectiveTo determine whether public reporting for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with lower rates of PCI for patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) or with higher mortality rates in this population.Design, setting, and patientsRetrospective observational study conducted using data from fee-for-service Medicare patients (49,660 from reporting states and 48,142 from nonreporting states) admitted with acute MI to US acute care hospitals between 2002 and 2010. Logistic regression was used to compare PCI and mortality rates between reporting states (New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania) and regional nonreporting states (Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Delaware). Changes in PCI rates over time in Massachusetts compared with nonreporting states were also examined.Main outcome measuresRisk-adjusted PCI and mortality rates.ResultsIn 2010, patients with acute MI were less likely to receive PCI in public reporting states than in nonreporting states (unadjusted rates, 37.7% vs 42.7%, respectively; risk-adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.71-0.93]; P = .003). Differences were greatest among the 6708 patients with ST-segment elevation MI (61.8% vs 68.0%; OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59-0.89]; P = .002) and the 2194 patients with cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest (41.5% vs 46.7%; OR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.64-0.98]; P = .03). There were no differences in overall mortality among patients with acute MI in reporting vs nonreporting states. In Massachusetts, odds of PCI for acute MI were comparable with odds in nonreporting states prior to public reporting (40.6% vs 41.8%; OR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.71-1.41]). However, after implementation of public reporting, odds of undergoing PCI in Massachusetts decreased compared with nonreporting states (41.1% vs 45.6%; OR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.47-1.38]; P = .03 for difference in differences). Differences were most pronounced for the 6081 patients with cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest (prereporting: 44.2% vs 36.6%; OR, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.85-2.32]; postreporting: 43.9% vs 44.8%; OR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.38-2.22]; P = .03 for difference in differences).ConclusionsAmong Medicare beneficiaries with acute MI, the use of PCI was lower for patients treated in 3 states with public reporting of PCI outcomes compared with patients treated in 7 regional control states without public reporting. However, there was no difference in overall acute MI mortality between states with and without public reporting.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Recent policy efforts have focused on improving the value of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care. Medicare payment programs, for example, increasingly evaluate hospital performance based on spending, as determined by payments made to institutions and providers, and outcome measures for a longitudinal episode of AMI care. Little is known about the relationship between total 30-day payments-both in the inpatient and immediate postdischarge timeframe-and outcomes after an admission for AMI. METHODS AND RESULTS:Using Medicare claims data, we identified Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries ?65 years of age who were hospitalized at an acute-care hospital for AMI between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2014, and examined the association between hospital-level 30-day payments for an episode of AMI care and patient 30-day mortality using mixed regression models with a logit link function and random hospital intercepts. Our cohort included 642 105 index hospitalizations for AMI at 2319 acute-care hospitals. Overall mean 30-day episode payments per beneficiary were $22 128 (SD, $1750). The observed 30-day mortality rate was 12.9%. Higher 30-day payments were associated with lower 30-day mortality after adjustment for patient characteristics and comorbidities (adjusted odds ratio for additional $1000 payments, 0.986; 95% confidence interval, 0.979-0.992; P<0.001). Additional adjustment for potential mediating factors, including hospital characteristics, coronary revascularization rates, and discharge disposition, did not significantly attenuate the relationship (adjusted odds ratio for additional $1000 payments, 0.987; 95% confidence interval, 0.980-0.994; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Higher hospital-level 30-day payments-both inpatient and in multiple settings after discharge-for AMI care were associated with lower 30-day mortality among beneficiaries. This may have implications for payment programs that incent reduction in payments without considering value.

Project description:ImportancePayers and policy makers have advocated for transitioning toward value-based payment models. However, little is known about what is the extent of hospital variation in the value of care and whether there are any hospital characteristics associated with high-value care.ObjectivesTo investigate the association between hospital-level 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates (RSMRs) and 30-day risk-standardized payments (RSPs) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), and pneumonia (PNA); to characterize patterns of value in care; and to identify hospital characteristics associated with high-value care (defined by having lower than median RSMRs and RSPs).Design, setting, and participantsThis national cross-sectional study applied weighted linear correlation to investigate the association between hospital RSMRs and RSPs for AMI, HF, and PNA between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2014, among all hospitals; examined correlations in subgroups of hospitals based on key characteristics; and assessed the proportion and characteristics of hospitals delivering high-value care. The data analysis was completed in October 2017. The setting was acute care hospitals. Participants were Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries discharged with AMI, HF, or PNA.Main outcomes and measuresHospital-level 30-day RSMRs and RSPs for AMI, HF, and PNA.ResultsThe AMI sample consisted of 4339 hospitals with 487 141 hospitalizations for mortality and 462 905 hospitalizations for payment. The HF sample included 4641 hospitals with 960 960 hospitalizations for mortality and 903 721 hospitalizations for payment. The PNA sample contained 4685 hospitals with 952 022 hospitalizations for mortality and 901 764 hospitalizations for payment. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) RSMRs and RSPs, respectively, was 14.3% (IQR, 13.8%-14.8%) and $21 620 (IQR, $20 966-$22 567) for AMI, 11.7% (IQR, 11.0%-12.5%) and $15 139 (IQR, $14 310-$16 118) for HF, and 11.5% (IQR, 10.6%-12.6%) and $14 220 (IQR, $13 342-$15 097) for PNA. There were statistically significant but weak inverse correlations between the RSMRs and RSPs of -0.08 (95% CI, -0.11 to -0.05) for AMI, -0.21 (95% CI, -0.24 to -0.18) for HF, and -0.07 (95% CI, -0.09 to -0.04) for PNA. The largest shared variance between the RSMRs and RSPs was only 4.4% (for HF). The correlations between the RSMRs and RSPs did not differ significantly across teaching status, safety-net status, urban/rural status, or the proportion of patients with low socioeconomic status. Approximately 1 in 4 hospitals (20.9% for AMI, 23.0% for HF, and 23.9% for PNA) had both lower than median RSMRs and RSPs.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that there is significant potential for improvement in the value of AMI, HF, and PNA care and also suggest that high-value care for these conditions is attainable across most hospital types.

Project description:Importance:Intensive care unit (ICU) utilization may have important implications for the care and outcomes of patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Objectives:To examine interhospital variation in ICU utilization in the United States for older adults with hemodynamically stable NSTEMI and outcomes associated with ICU utilization among patients with low, moderate, or high mortality risk. Design, Setting, and Participants:This study was a retrospective analysis of 28?018 Medicare patients 65 years or older admitted with NSTEMI to 346 hospitals participating in the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network (ACTION)-Get With the Guidelines from April 1, 2011, through December 31, 2012. Patients with cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest on presentation were excluded. Data analysis was performed from May 7 through October 8, 2015. Exposures:Hospitals with high (>70% of patients with NSTEMI treated in an ICU during the index hospitalization), intermediate (30%-70%), or low (<30%) ICU utilization. Main Outcomes and Measures:Thirty-day mortality. Results:Of 28?018 patients with NSTEMI 65 years or older (median age, 77 years [interquartile range, 71-84 years]; female, 13 055 [46.6%]; nonwhite race, 3931 [14.0%]), 11?934 (42.6%) had an ICU stay. The proportion of patients with NSTEMI treated in the ICU varied across hospitals (median, 38%; interquartile range, 26%-54%), but no significant differences were found in hospital or patient characteristics among high, intermediate, or low ICU utilization hospitals. Compared with high ICU utilization hospitals, low or intermediate ICU utilization hospitals were only marginally more selective of higher-risk patients, as determined by ACTION in-hospital mortality risk score or initial troponin level. The median ACTION risk score for patients treated in the ICU at low and intermediate ICU utilization hospitals was 34 compared with 33 for patients not treated in the ICU; at high ICU utilization hospitals, the median ACTION mortality risk score was 33 for patients treated in the ICU and 34 for patients not treated in the ICU. Thirty-day mortality rates did not significantly differ based on hospital ICU utilization (high vs low: 8.7% vs 8.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.76-1.08; intermediate vs low: 9.6% vs 8.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.94-1.20). The association between hospital ICU utilization and mortality did not change when considered among patients with ACTION risk scores greater than 40, 30 to 40, and less than 30 (adjusted interaction P?=?.86). Conclusions and Relevance:Utilization of the ICU for older patients with NSTEMI varied significantly among hospitals. This variability was not explained by hospital characteristics or driven by patient risk. Mortality after myocardial infarction did not significantly differ among high, intermediate, or low ICU utilization hospitals.

Project description:High-intensity statins are recommended following myocardial infarction. However, patients may not continue taking this medication with high adherence.To estimate the proportion of patients filling high-intensity statin prescriptions following myocardial infarction who continue taking this medication with high adherence and to analyze factors associated with continuing a high-intensity statin with high adherence after myocardial infarction.Retrospective cohort study of Medicare patients following hospitalization for myocardial infarction. Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 to 75 years (n?=?29?932) and older than 75 years (n?=?27?956) hospitalized for myocardial infarction between 2007 and 2012 who filled a high-intensity statin prescription (atorvastatin, 40-80 mg, and rosuvastatin, 20-40 mg) within 30 days of discharge. Beneficiaries had Medicare fee-for-service coverage including pharmacy benefits.Sociodemographic, dual Medicare/Medicaid coverage, comorbidities, not filling high-intensity statin prescriptions before their myocardial infarction (ie, new users), and cardiac rehabilitation and outpatient cardiologist visits after discharge.High adherence to high-intensity statins at 6 months and 2 years after discharge was defined by a proportion of days covered of at least 80%, down-titration was defined by switching to a low/moderate-intensity statin with a proportion of days covered of at least 80%, and low adherence was defined by a proportion of days covered less than 80% for any statin intensity without discontinuation. Discontinuation was defined by not having a statin available to take in the last 60 days of each follow-up period.Approximately half of the beneficiaries were women and fourth-fifths were white. At 6 months and 2 years after discharge among beneficiaries 66 to 75 years of age, 17?633 (58.9%) and 10?308 (41.6%) were taking high-intensity statins with high adherence, 2605 (8.7%) and 3315 (13.4%) down-titrated, 5182 (17.3%) and 4727 (19.1%) had low adherence, and 3705 (12.4%) and 4648 (18.8%) discontinued their statin, respectively. The proportion taking high-intensity statins with high adherence increased between 2007 and 2012. African American patients, Hispanic patients, and new high-intensity statin users were less likely to take high-intensity statins with high adherence, and those with dual Medicare/Medicaid coverage and more cardiologist visits after discharge and who participated in cardiac rehabilitation were more likely to take high-intensity statins with high adherence. Results were similar among beneficiaries older than 75 years of age.Many patients filling high-intensity statins following a myocardial infarction do not continue taking this medication with high adherence for 2 years postdischarge. Interventions are needed to increase high-intensity statin use and adherence after myocardial infarction.