Changes in coding of pneumonia and impact on the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To evaluate whether changes in diagnosis assignment explain reductions in 30-day readmission for patients with pneumonia following the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP).Data sources
100 percent MedPAR, 2008-2015.Study design
Retrospective cohort study of Medicare discharges in HRRP-eligible hospitals. Outcomes were 30-day readmission rates for pneumonia under a "narrow" definition (used for the HRRP until October 2015; n = 2 288 644) and a "broad" definition that included certain diagnoses of sepsis and aspiration pneumonia (used since October 2015; n = 3 618 215). We estimated changes in 30-day readmissions in the pre-HRRP period (January 2008-March 2010), the HRRP implementation period (April 2010-September 2012), and the HRRP penalty period (October 2012-June 2015).Principal findings
Under the narrow definition, adjusted annual readmission rates changed by +0.07 percentage points (pp) during the pre-HRRP period (95% CI: -0.03 pp, +0.18 pp), -1.07 pp during HRRP implementation (95% CI: -1.15 pp, -0.99 pp), and -0.09 pp during the penalty period (95% CI: -0.18 pp, -0.00 pp). Under the broad definition, 30-day readmissions changed by +0.21 pp during the pre-HRRP period (95% CI: +0.12 pp, +0.30 pp), -1.28 pp during HRRP implementation (95% CI: -1.35 pp, -1.21 pp), and -0.09 pp during the penalty period (95% CI: -0.16 pp, -0.02 pp).Conclusions
Changes in the coding of inpatient pneumonia admissions do not explain readmission reduction following the HRRP.
SUBMITTER: Buxbaum JD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6863226 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Changes in coding of pneumonia and impact on the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program.
Buxbaum Jason D JD Lindenauer Peter K PK Cooke Colin R CR Nuliyalu Ushapoorna U Ryan Andrew M AM
Health services research 20191010 6
<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate whether changes in diagnosis assignment explain reductions in 30-day readmission for patients with pneumonia following the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP).<h4>Data sources</h4>100 percent MedPAR, 2008-2015.<h4>Study design</h4>Retrospective cohort study of Medicare discharges in HRRP-eligible hospitals. Outcomes were 30-day readmission rates for pneumonia under a "narrow" definition (used for the HRRP until October 2015; n = 2 288 644) and a "broad" de ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesDespite substantial attention on hospital readmission rates, the impact of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) on a comprehensive set of Triple Aim goals has not been studied: improve hospital quality, reduce cost, and improve patient experience.MethodsWe analyze inpatient claims data from 2006 to 2015 from the Dallas Fort Worth Hospital Council Foundation with a panel of 27,397 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and congestive heart failure. We deploy a quasi-natural experiment using a difference-in-difference specification to estimate the effect of HRRP effect on readmission rates, length of stay (LOS), and hospital satisfaction.ResultsWe find that the likelihood of 30-day readmissions declined by 2.6%, average LOS decreased by 7.9%, and overall hospital rating increased by 2.1% among hospitals that fell under the scope of the HRRP, compared to non-HRRP hospitals. Our results provide evidence of a spillover effect of the HRRP in terms of its impact not only on Medicare patients, but across all insurance types, and other performance measures such as cost and patient experience.ConclusionOur findings indicate that HRRP hospitals do not trade-off reductions in readmission rates with lower quality across other patient health outcomes. Rather, we find evidence that the HRRP has affected all 3 dimensions of the Triple Aim with respect to patient and hospital outcomes.
| S-EPMC7894595 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Risk-standardized 30-day mortality and hospital readmission rates for pneumonia are increasingly being tied to hospital reimbursement to incentivize the delivery of high-quality care. Such measures may be susceptible to gaming by recoding patients with pneumonia to a primary diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure. We sought to determine the degree to which hospitals can game mortality or readmission measures and change their rankings by recoding patients with pneumonia.Simulated experimental study of 2,906 U.S. acute care hospitals with at least 25 admissions for pneumonia using 2009 Medicare data.Elderly (age ? 65 yr) Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized with pneumonia. Patients eligible for recoding to sepsis or respiratory failure were those with a principal International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, Clinical Modification, discharge code for pneumonia and secondary codes for respiratory failure or acute organ dysfunction.None.We measured the number of hospitals that improved their pneumonia mortality or readmission rates after recoding eligible patients. When a sample of 100 hospitals with pneumonia mortality rates above the 50th percentile recoded all eligible patients to sepsis or respiratory failure, 90 hospitals (95% CI, 84-95) improved their mortality rate (mean improvement, 1.09%; 95% CI, 0.94-1.28%) and 41 hospitals dropped below the 50th percentile (95% CI, 33-52). When a sample of 100 hospitals with pneumonia readmission rates above the 50th percentile recoded all eligible patients, 66 hospitals (95% CI, 54-75) improved their readmission rate (mean improvement, 0.34%; 95% CI, 0.19-0.45%) and 15 hospitals (95% CI, 9-22) dropped below the 50th percentile.Hospitals can improve apparent pneumonia mortality and readmission rates by recoding pneumonia patients. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should consider changes to their methods used to calculate hospital-level pneumonia outcome measures to make them less susceptible to gaming.
| S-EPMC4617210 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We examined the financial incentives to avoid readmissions under Medicare's Hospital Readmission Reduction Program for safety-net hospitals (SNHs) and teaching hospitals (THs) compared with other hospitals. Using Medicare's FY2016 Hospital Compare and readmissions data for 2,465 hospitals, we tested for differential revenue gains for SNHs (n = 658) relative to non-SNHs (n = 1,807), and for major (n = 231) and minor (n = 591) THs relative to non-THs (n = 1,643). We examined hospital-level factors predicting differences in revenue gains by hospital type. The revenue gains of an avoided readmission were 10% to 15% greater for major THs compared with non-THs ($18,047 vs. $15,478 for acute myocardial infarction) but no different for SNHs compared with non-SNHs. The greater revenue gains for THs were strongly positively predicted by hospitals' poor initial readmission performance. We found little evidence that the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program creates disincentives for SNHs and THs to invest in readmission reduction efforts, and THs have greater returns from readmissions avoidance than non-THs.
| S-EPMC6656617 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the reliability of risk-standardized readmission rates (RSRRs) for medical conditions and surgical procedures used in the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP).Data sourcesState Inpatient Databases for six states from 2011 to 2013 were used to identify patient cohorts for the six conditions used in the HRRP, which was augmented with hospital characteristic and HRRP penalty data.Study designHierarchical logistic regression models estimated hospital-level RSRRs for each condition, the reliability of each RSRR, and the extent to which socioeconomic and hospital factors further explain RSRR variation. We used publicly available data to estimate payments for excess readmissions in hospitals with reliable and unreliable RSRRs.Principal findingsOnly RSRRs for surgical procedures exceeded the reliability benchmark for most hospitals, whereas RSRRs for medical conditions were typically below the benchmark. Additional adjustment for socioeconomic and hospital factors modestly explained variation in RSRRs. Approximately 25 percent of payments for excess readmissions were tied to unreliable RSRRs.ConclusionsMany of the RSRRs employed by the HRRP are unreliable, and one quarter of payments for excess readmissions are associated with unreliable RSRRs. Unreliable measures blur the connection between hospital performance and incentives, and threaten the success of the HRRP.
| S-EPMC5134200 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceMedicare is experimenting with numerous concurrent reforms aimed at improving quality and value for hospitals. It is unclear if these myriad reforms are mutually reinforcing or in conflict with each other.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether hospital participation in voluntary value-based reforms was associated with greater improvement under Medicare's Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP).Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective, longitudinal study using publicly available national data from Hospital Compare on hospital readmissions for 2837 hospitals from 2008 to 2015. We assessed hospital participation in 3 voluntary value-based reforms: Meaningful Use of Electronic Health Records; the Bundled Payment for Care Initiative episode-based payment program (BPCI); and Medicare's Pioneer and Shared Savings accountable care organization (ACO) programs. We used an interrupted time series design to test whether hospitals' time-varying participation in these value-based reforms was associated with greater improvement in Medicare's HRRP.Main outcomes and measuresThirty-day risk standardized readmission rates for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure, and pneumonia.ResultsAmong the 2837 hospitals in this study, participation in value-based reforms varied considerably over the study period. In 2010, no hospitals were participating in the meaningful use, ACO, or BPCI programs. By 2015, only 56 hospitals were not participating in at least 1 of these programs. Among hospitals that did not participate in any voluntary reforms, the association between the HRRP and 30-day readmission was -0.76 percentage points for AMI (95% CI, -0.93 to -0.60), -1.30 percentage points for heart failure (95% CI, -1.47 to -1.13), and -0.82 percentage points for pneumonia (95% CI, -0.97 to -0.67). Participation in the meaningful use program alone was associated with an additional change in 30-day readmissions of -0.78 percentage points for AMI (95% CI, -0.89 to -0.67), -0.97 percentage points for heart failure (95% CI, -1.08 to -0.86), and -0.56 percentage points for pneumonia (95% CI, -0.65 to -0.47). Participation in ACO programs alone was associated with an additional change in 30-day readmissions of -0.94 percentage points for AMI (95% CI, -1.29 to -0.59), -0.83 percentage points for heart failure (95% CI, -1.26 to -0.41), and -0.59 percentage points for pneumonia (95% CI, -1.00 to -0.18). Participation in multiple reforms led to greater improvement: participation in all 3 programs was associated with an additional change in 30-day readmissions of -1.27 percentage points for AMI (95% CI, -1.58 to -0.97), -1.64 percentage points for heart failure (95% CI, -2.02 to -1.26), and -1.05 percentage points for pneumonia (95% CI, -1.32 to -0.78).Conclusions and relevanceHospital participation in voluntary value-based reforms was associated with greater reductions in readmissions. Our findings lend support for Medicare's multipronged strategy to improve hospital quality and value.
| S-EPMC5800776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:The strongest evidence for the effectiveness of Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) involves greater reductions in readmissions for hospitals receiving penalties compared with those not receiving penalties. However, the HRRP penalty is an imperfect measure of hospitals' marginal incentive to avoid a readmission for HRRP-targeted diagnoses. Objectives:To assess the association between hospitals' condition-specific incentives and readmission performance and to examine the responsiveness of hospitals to condition-specific incentives compared with aggregate penalty amounts. Design, Setting, and Participants:This retrospective cohort analysis used Medicare readmissions data from 2823 US short-term acute care hospitals participating in HRRP to compare 3-year (fiscal years 2016-2019) follow-up readmission performance according to tertiles of hospitals' baseline (2016) marginal incentives for each of 5 HRRP-targeted conditions (acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, and hip and/or knee surgery). Main Outcomes and Measures:Linear regression models were used to estimate mean change in follow-up readmission performance, measured using the excess readmissions ratio, with baseline condition-specific incentives and aggregate penalty amounts. Results:Of 2823 hospitals that participated in the HRRP from baseline to follow-up, 2280 (81%) had more than 1 excess readmission for 1 or more applicable condition and 543 (19%) did not have any excess readmissions. The mean (SD) financial incentive to reduce readmissions for incentivized hospitals ranged from $8762 ($3699) to $58?158 ($26?198) per 1 avoided readmission. Hospitals with greater incentives for readmission avoidance had greater decreases in readmissions compared with hospitals with smaller incentives (45% greater for pneumonia, 172% greater for acute myocardial infarction, 40% greater for hip and/or knee surgery, 32% greater for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 13% greater for heart failure), whereas hospitals with no incentives had increases in excess readmissions of 4% to 7% (median, 4% [percentage change for nonincentivized hospitals was 3.7% for pneumonia, 4.2% for acute myocardial infarction, 7.1% for hip and/or knee surgery, 3.7% for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 3.7% for heart failure]; P?<?.001). During the study period, each additional $5000 in the incentive amount was associated with a 0.6- to 1.3-percentage point decrease, or up to a 26% decrease, in excess readmissions (P?<?.001). Regression to the mean explained approximately one-third of the results depending on the condition examined. Conclusions and Relevance:The findings suggest that improvements in readmission avoidance are more strongly associated with incentives from the HRRP than with aggregate penalty amounts, suggesting that the program has elicited sizeable changes. Worsened performance among hospitals with small or no incentives may indicate the need for reconsideration of the program's lack of financial rewards for high-performing hospitals.
| S-EPMC7125432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Readmission rates declined after announcement of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP), which penalizes hospitals for excess readmissions for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), and pneumonia.To compare trends in readmission rates for target and nontarget conditions, stratified by hospital penalty status.Retrospective cohort study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries older than 64 years discharged between January 1, 2008, and June 30, 2015, from 2214 penalty hospitals and 1283 nonpenalty hospitals. Difference-interrupted time-series models were used to compare trends in readmission rates by condition and penalty status.Hospital penalty status or target condition under the HRRP.Thirty-day risk adjusted, all-cause unplanned readmission rates for target and nontarget conditions.The study included 48?137?102 hospitalizations of 20?351?161 Medicare beneficiaries. In January 2008, the mean readmission rates for AMI, HF, pneumonia, and nontarget conditions were 21.9%, 27.5%, 20.1%, and 18.4%, respectively, at hospitals later subject to financial penalties and 18.7%, 24.2%, 17.4%, and 15.7% at hospitals not subject to penalties. Between January 2008 and March 2010, prior to HRRP announcement, readmission rates were stable across hospitals (except AMI at nonpenalty hospitals). Following announcement of HRRP (March 2010), readmission rates for both target and nontarget conditions declined significantly faster for patients at hospitals later subject to financial penalties compared with those at nonpenalized hospitals (for AMI, additional decrease of -1.24 [95% CI, -1.84 to -0.65] percentage points per year relative to nonpenalty discharges; for HF, -1.25 [95% CI, -1.64 to -0.86]; for pneumonia, -1.37 [95% CI, -1.80 to -0.95]; and for nontarget conditions, -0.27 [95% CI, -0.38 to -0.17]; P?<?.001 for all). For penalty hospitals, readmission rates for target conditions declined significantly faster compared with nontarget conditions (for AMI, additional decline of -0.49 [95% CI, -0.81 to -0.16] percentage points per year relative to nontarget conditions [P?=?.004]; for HF, -0.90 [95% CI, -1.18 to -0.62; P?<?.001]; and for pneumonia, -0.57 [95% CI, -0.92 to -0.23; P?<?.001]). In contrast, among nonpenalty hospitals, readmissions for target conditions declined similarly or more slowly compared with nontarget conditions (for AMI, additional increase of 0.48 [95% CI, 0.01-0.95] percentage points per year [P?=?.05]; for HF, 0.08 [95% CI, -0.30 to 0.46; P?=?.67]; for pneumonia, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.13-0.93; P?=?.01]). After HRRP implementation in October 2012, the rate of change for readmission rates plateaued (P?<?.05 for all except pneumonia at nonpenalty hospitals), with the greatest relative change observed among hospitals subject to financial penalty.Medicare fee-for-service patients at hospitals subject to penalties under the HRRP had greater reductions in readmission rates compared with those at nonpenalized hospitals. Changes were greater for target vs nontarget conditions for patients at the penalized hospitals but not at the other hospitals.
| S-EPMC5599851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOn average Black patients have longer LOS than comparable White patients. Longer hospital length of stay (LOS) may be associated with higher readmission risk. However, evidence suggests that the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) reduced overall racial differences in 30-day adjusted readmission risk. Yet, it is unclear whether the HRRP narrowed these LOS racial differences.ObjectiveWe examined the relationship between Medicare-insured Black-White differences in average, adjusted LOS (ALOS) and the HRRP's implementation and evaluation periods.MethodsUsing 2009-2017 data from State Inpatient Dataset from New York, New Jersey, and Florida, we employed an interrupted time series analysis with multivariate generalized regression models controlling for patient, disease, and hospital characteristics. Results are reported per 100 admissions.ResultsWe found that for those discharged home, Black-White ALOS differences significantly widened by 4.15 days per 100 admissions (95% CI: 1.19 to 7.11, P < 0.001) for targeted conditions from before to after the HRRP implementation period, but narrowed in the HRRP evaluation period by 1.84 days per 100 admissions for every year-quarter (95% CI: -2.86 to -0.82, P < 0.001); for those discharged to non-home destinations, there was no significant change between HRRP periods, but ALOS differences widened over the study period. Black-White ALOS differences for non-targeted conditions remained unchanged regardless of HRRP phase and discharge destination.ConclusionIncreased LOS for Black patients may have played a role in reducing Black-White disparities in 30-day readmission risks for targeted conditions among patients discharged to home.
| S-EPMC8411641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesExamine whether the introduction of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) is associated with changes in post-acute care (PAC) use and 30-day readmission.DesignA retrospective cohort study examined data prepassage, preimplementation, and postimplementation of the HRRP.Setting and participantsIn total, 7,851,430 Medicare beneficiaries discharged from 5116 acute hospitals to PAC settings including inpatient rehabilitation, skilled nursing, home health, or a long-term care hospital during 2007‒2015. We examined HRRP-targeted conditions (acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia) and nontargeted conditions (ischemic stroke, total hip arthroplasty/total knee arthroplasty, and hip/femur fractures).MeasuresThe hospital-level of quarterly PAC use and the association with 30-day risk-standardized readmission rates. Outcomes were calculated for HRRP-targeted and nontargeted conditions/diagnoses across 3 phases of HRRP implementation.ResultsAn increase in quarterly PAC use was significantly (P < .001) associated with a decrease in 30-day risk-standardized readmission rates for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and hip/femur fracture. In contrast, an increase in quarterly PAC use was significantly associated with an increase in readmission rate for total hip arthroplasty/total knee arthroplasty (P < 001). PAC quarterly use and readmission rates varied significantly during implementation periods for HRRP- targeted and nontargeted conditions.Conclusions and implicationsThe impact on readmission after PAC for selected impairment groups may be mediated by the type of PAC services received and whether the diagnoses is included in the HRRP. Additional research is necessary to determine if a reduction in readmission is associated with inclusion in the HRRP or is a side effect related to diagnostic group and/or type of PAC services received.
| S-EPMC7529906 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhether hospitals with the highest risk-standardized readmission rates (RSRRs) subsequently experienced the greatest improvement after passage of the Medicare Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) is unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether passage of the HRRP was followed by acceleration in improvement in 30-day RSRRs after hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), congestive heart failure (CHF), or pneumonia and whether the lowest-performing hospitals had faster acceleration in improvement after passage of the law than hospitals that were already performing well.DesignPre-post analysis stratified by hospital performance groups.SettingU.S. acute care hospitals.Patients15 170 008 Medicare patients discharged alive from 2000 to 2013.InterventionPassage of the HRRP.Measurements30-day readmission rates after hospitalization for AMI, CHF, or pneumonia for hospitals in the highest-performance (0% penalty), average-performance (>0% and <0.50% penalty), low-performance (≥0.50% and <0.99% penalty), and lowest-performance (≥0.99% penalty) groups.ResultsOf 2868 hospitals serving 1 109 530 Medicare discharges annually, 30.1% were highest performers, 44.0% were average performers, 16.8% were low performers, and 9.0% were lowest performers. After controlling for prelaw trends, an additional 67.6 (95% CI, 66.6 to 68.4), 74.8 (CI, 74.0 to 75.4), 85.4 (CI, 84.0 to 86.8), and 95.1 (CI, 92.6 to 97.5) readmissions per 10 000 discharges were found to have been averted per year in the highest-, average-, low-, and lowest-performance groups, respectively, after passage of the law.LimitationInability to distinguish between improvement caused by the magnitude of the penalty or by different levels of health improvement in different patient populations.ConclusionAfter passage of the HRRP, 30-day RSRRs for myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia decreased more rapidly than before the law's passage. Improvement was most marked for hospitals with the lowest prelaw performance.Primary funding sourceNational Institutes of Health.
| S-EPMC5507076 | biostudies-literature