Dataset Information

Sepsis Among Medicare Beneficiaries: 4. Precoronavirus Disease 2019 Update January 2012-February 2020.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To provide updated information on the burdens of sepsis during acute inpatient admissions for Medicare beneficiaries.

Design

Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services DataLink Project.

Setting

All U.S. acute-care hospitals, excluding federally operated hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency).

Patients

All Medicare beneficiaries, January 2012-February 2020, with an explicit sepsis diagnostic code assigned during an inpatient admission.

Interventions

None.

Measurements and main results

The count of Medicare Part A/B (fee-for-service) plus Medicare Advantage inpatient sepsis admissions rose from 981,027 (CY2012) to 1,700,433 (CY 2019). The proportion of total admissions with sepsis in the Medicare Advantage population rose from 21.43% to 35.39%, reflecting the increasing beneficiary proportion enrolled in Medicare Advantage. In CY2019, 6-month mortality rates in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries for sepsis continued to decline, but remained high: 59.9% for septic shock, 35.5% for severe sepsis, 30.8% for sepsis attributed to a specific organism, and 26.5% for unspecified sepsis. Total fee-for-service-only inpatient hospital costs rose from $17.79B (CY2012) to $22.98B (CY2019). We estimated that the aggregate cost of sepsis hospital care for the entire U.S. population was at least $57.47B in 2019. Inclusion of 14 months' (January 2019-February 2020) newer data exposed new trends: the cost per patient, number of admissions, and fraction of patients with sepsis labeled as present on admission inflected around November 2015, coincident with the change to International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition, and introduction of the Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) metric.

Conclusions

Sepsis among Medicare beneficiaries precoronavirus disease 2019 imposed immense burdens upon patients, their families, and the taxpayers.

SUBMITTER: Frank CE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8594514 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To provide contemporary estimates of the burdens (costs and mortality) associated with acute inpatient Medicare beneficiary admissions for sepsis. DESIGN:Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services DataLink Project. SETTING:All U.S. acute care hospitals, excluding federally operated hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency). PATIENTS:All Medicare beneficiaries, 2012-2018, with an inpatient admission including one or more explicit sepsis codes. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Total inpatient hospital and skilled nursing facility admission counts, costs, and mortality over time. From calendar year (CY)2012-CY2018, the total number of Medicare Part A/B (fee-for-service) beneficiaries with an inpatient hospital admission associated with an explicit sepsis code rose from 811,644 to 1,136,889. The total cost of inpatient hospital admission including an explicit sepsis code for those beneficiaries in those calendar years rose from $17,792,657,303 to $22,439,794,212. The total cost of skilled nursing facility care in the 90 days subsequent to an inpatient hospital discharge that included an explicit sepsis code for Medicare Part A/B rose from $3,931,616,160 to $5,623,862,486 over that same interval. Precise costs are not available for Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage) patients. Using available federal data sources, we estimated the aggregate cost of inpatient admissions and skilled nursing facility admissions for Medicare Advantage patients to have risen from $6.0 to $13.4 billion over the CY2012-CY2018 interval. Combining data for fee-for-service beneficiaries and estimates for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, we estimate the total inpatient admission sepsis cost and any subsequent skilled nursing facility admission for all (fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage) Medicare patients to have risen from $27.7 to $41.5 billion. Contemporary 6-month mortality rates for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with a sepsis inpatient admission remain high: for septic shock, approximately 60%; for severe sepsis, approximately 36%; for sepsis attributed to a specific organism, approximately 31%; and for unspecified sepsis, approximately 27%. CONCLUSION:Sepsis remains common, costly to treat, and presages significant mortality for Medicare beneficiaries.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To distinguish characteristics of Medicare beneficiaries who will have an acute inpatient admission for sepsis from those who have an inpatient admission without sepsis, and to describe their further trajectories during and subsequent to those inpatient admissions. DESIGN:Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services DataLink Project. SETTING:All U.S. acute care hospitals, excepting federal hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency). PATIENTS:Medicare beneficiaries, 2012-2018, with an inpatient hospital admission including one or more explicit sepsis codes. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Prevalent diagnoses in the year prior to the inpatient admission; healthcare contacts in the week prior to the inpatient admission; discharges, transfers, readmissions, and deaths (trajectories) for 6 months following discharge from the inpatient admission. Beneficiaries with no sepsis inpatient hospital admission for a year prior to an index hospital admission for sepsis were nearly indistinguishable by accumulated diagnostic codes from beneficiaries who had an index hospital admission without sepsis. Although the timing of healthcare services in the week prior to inpatient hospital admission was similar among beneficiaries who would be admitted for sepsis versus those whose inpatient admission did not include a sepsis code, the setting differed: beneficiaries destined for a sepsis admission were more likely to have received skilled nursing or unskilled nursing (e.g., nursing aide for activities of daily living) care. In contrast, comparing beneficiaries who had been free of any inpatient admission for an entire year and then required an inpatient admission, acute inpatient stays that included a sepsis code led to more than three times as many deaths within 1 week of discharge, with more admissions to skilled nursing facilities and fewer discharges to home. Comparing all beneficiaries who were admitted to a skilled nursing facility after an inpatient hospital admission, those who had sepsis coded during the index admission were more likely to die in the skilled nursing facility; more likely to be readmitted to an acute inpatient hospital and subsequently die in that setting; or if they survive to discharge from the skilled nursing facility, they are more likely to go next to a custodial nursing home. CONCLUSIONS:Although Medicare beneficiaries destined for an inpatient hospital admission with a sepsis code are nearly indistinguishable by other diagnostic codes from those whose admissions will not have a sepsis code, their healthcare trajectories following the admission are worse. This suggests that an inpatient stay that included a sepsis code not only identifies beneficiaries who were less resilient to infection but also signals increased risk for worsening health, for mortality, and for increased use of advanced healthcare services during and postdischarge along with an increased likelihood of an inpatient hospital readmission.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the impact of sepsis, age, and comorbidities on death following an acute inpatient admission and to model and forecast inpatient and skilled nursing facility costs for Medicare beneficiaries during and subsequent to an acute inpatient sepsis admission. DESIGN:Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services DataLink Project (CMS) and leveraging the CMS-Hierarchical Condition Category risk adjustment model. SETTING:All U.S. acute care hospitals, excepting federal hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency). PATIENTS:All Part A/B (fee-for-service) Medicare beneficiaries with an acute inpatient admission in 2017 and who had no inpatient sepsis admission in the prior year. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Logistic regression models to determine covariate risk contribution to death following an acute inpatient admission; conventional regression to predict Medicare beneficiary sepsis costs. Using the Hierarchical Condition Category risk adjustment model to illuminate influence of illness on outcome of inpatient admissions, representative odds ratios (with 95% CIs) for death within 6 months of an admission (referenced to beneficiaries admitted but without the characteristic) are as follows: septic shock, 7.27 (7.19-7.35); metastatic cancer and acute leukemia (Hierarchical Condition Category 8), 6.76 (6.71-6.82); all sepsis, 2.63 (2.62-2.65); respiratory arrest (Hierarchical Condition Category 83), 2.55 (2.35-2.77); end-stage liver disease (Hierarchical Condition Category 27), 2.53 (2.49-2.56); and severe sepsis without shock, 2.48 (2.45-2.51). Models of the cost of sepsis care for Medicare beneficiaries forecast arise approximately 13% over 2 years owing the rising enrollments in Medicare offset by the cost of care per admission. CONCLUSIONS:A sepsis inpatient admission is associated with marked increase in risk of death that is comparable to the risks associated with inpatient admissions for other common and serious chronic illnesses. The aggregate costs of sepsis care for Medicare beneficiaries will continue to increase.

Project description:An outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) began in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in December 2019, and has spread throughout China and to 31 other countries and territories, including the United States (1). As of February 23, 2020, there were 76,936 reported cases in mainland China and 1,875 cases in locations outside mainland China (1). There have been 2,462 associated deaths worldwide; no deaths have been reported in the United States. Fourteen cases have been diagnosed in the United States, and an additional 39 cases have occurred among repatriated persons from high-risk settings, for a current total of 53 cases within the United States. This report summarizes the aggressive measures (2,3) that CDC, state and local health departments, multiple other federal agencies, and other partners are implementing to slow and try to contain transmission of COVID-19 in the United States. These measures require the identification of cases and contacts of persons with COVID-19 in the United States and the recommended assessment, monitoring, and care of travelers arriving from areas with substantial COVID-19 transmission. Although these measures might not prevent widespread transmission of the virus in the United States, they are being implemented to 1) slow the spread of illness; 2) provide time to better prepare state and local health departments, health care systems, businesses, educational organizations, and the general public in the event that widespread transmission occurs; and 3) better characterize COVID-19 to guide public health recommendations and the development and deployment of medical countermeasures, including diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. U.S. public health authorities are monitoring the situation closely, and CDC is coordinating efforts with the World Health Organization (WHO) and other global partners. Interim guidance is available at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/index.html. As more is learned about this novel virus and this outbreak, CDC will rapidly incorporate new knowledge into guidance for action by CDC, state and local health departments, health care providers, and communities.

Project description:BackgroundSince the first cluster of cases was identified in Wuhan City, China, in December 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rapidly spreads globally. Scientists have made strides in estimating key transmission and epidemiological parameters. In particular, accumulating evidence points to a substantial fraction of asymptomatic or subclinical infections, which influences our understanding of the transmission potential and severity of this emerging disease. In this study, we derive estimates of the transmissibility and virulence of COVID-19 in Wuhan City, China, by reconstructing the underlying transmission dynamics using multiple data sources.MethodsWe employ statistical methods and publicly available epidemiological datasets to jointly derive estimates of transmissibility and severity associated with the novel coronavirus. For this purpose, the daily series of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths in Wuhan City together with epidemiological data of Japanese repatriated from Wuhan City on board government-chartered flights were integrated into our analysis.ResultsOur posterior estimates of basic reproduction number (R) in Wuhan City, China, in 2019-2020 reached values at 3.49 (95% CrI 3.39-3.62) with a mean serial interval of 6.0 days, and the enhanced public health intervention after January 23 in 2020 was associated with a significantly reduced R at 0.84 (95% CrI 0.81-0.88), with the total number of infections (i.e., cumulative infections) estimated at 1,906,634 (95% CrI 1,373,500-2,651,124) in Wuhan City, elevating the overall proportion of infected individuals to 19.1% (95% CrI 13.5-26.6%). We also estimated the most recent crude infection fatality ratio (IFR) and time-delay adjusted IFR at 0.04% (95% CrI 0.03-0.06%) and 0.12% (95% CrI 0.08-0.17%), respectively, estimates that are substantially smaller than the crude CFR estimated at 4.06%.ConclusionsWe have estimated key epidemiological parameters of the transmissibility and virulence of COVID-19 in Wuhan, China, during January-February 2020 using an ecological modeling approach that is suitable to infer epidemiological parameters with quantified uncertainty from partial observations collected by surveillance systems. Our estimate of time-delay adjusted IFR falls in the range of the median IFR estimates based on multiple serological studies conducted in several areas of the world.