Mortality, Hospital Costs, Payments, and Readmissions Associated With Clostridium difficile Infection Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: The management of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) among hospitalized patients is costly, and ongoing payment reform is compelling hospitals to reduce its burden. To assess the impact of CDI on mortality, hospital costs, healthcare use, and Medicare payments for beneficiaries who were discharged with CDI listed as a secondary International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification claim diagnosis. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the 2009 to 2010 5% random sample Medicare Standard Analytic Files of beneficiary claims. Patients with index hospitalizations with CDI as a secondary diagnosis and no previous hospitalization within 30 days were identified. Outcomes included inpatient and 30-day mortality, inpatient costs, index hospital payments, all-provider payments, net hospital losses, payment to cost ratio, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day readmission; outcomes were each risk adjusted using propensity score matching and regression modeling techniques. RESULTS: A total of 3262 patients with CDI were identified after matching to patients without a CDI diagnosis. After risk adjustment, secondary CDI was associated with statistically significantly (all P < 0.05) greater inpatient mortality (3.1% vs. 1.7%), 30-day mortality (4.1% vs. 2.2%), longer LOS (7.0 days vs. 3.8 days), higher rates of 30-day hospital readmissions (14.8% vs. 10.4%), and greater hospital costs ($16,184 vs. $13,954) compared with the non-CDI cohort. The risk-adjusted payment-to-cost ratio was shown to be lower for patients with CDI than those without (0.76 vs. 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: Secondary CDI is associated with greater adjusted mortality, costs, LOS, and hospital readmissions, while receiving similar hospital reimbursement compared with patients without CDI in a Medicare population.

A questionnaire to assess the relevance and credibility of observational studies to inform health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force report.

Evidence-based health care decisions are best informed by comparisons of all relevant interventions used to treat conditions in specific patient populations. Observational studies are being performed to help fill evidence gaps. Widespread adoption of evidence from observational studies, however, has been limited because of various factors, including the lack of consensus regarding accepted principles for their evaluation and interpretation. Two task forces were formed to develop questionnaires to assist decision makers in evaluating observational studies, with one Task Force addressing retrospective research and the other Task Force addressing prospective research. The intent was to promote a structured approach to reduce the potential for subjective interpretation of evidence and drive consistency in decision making. Separately developed questionnaires were combined into a single questionnaire consisting of 33 items. These were divided into two domains: relevance and credibility. Relevance addresses the extent to which findings, if accurate, apply to the setting of interest to the decision maker. Credibility addresses the extent to which the study findings accurately answer the study question. The questionnaire provides a guide for assessing the degree of confidence that should be placed from observational studies and promotes awareness of the subtleties involved in evaluating those.

Profit-seeking, corporate control, and the trustworthiness of health care organizations: assessments of health plan performance by their affiliated physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative trustworthiness of nonprofit and for-profit health plans, using physician assessments to measure dimensions of plan performance that are difficult for consumers to evaluate. DATA SOURCE: A nationally representative sample of 1,621 physicians who responded to a special topics module of the 1998 Socioeconomic Monitoring System Survey (SMS), fielded by the American Medical Association. Physicians assessed various aspects of their primary managed care plan, defined as the plan in which they had the largest number of patients. STUDY DESIGN: Plan ownership was measured as the interaction of tax-exempt status (nonprofit versus for-profit) and corporate control (single state versus multistate health plans). Two sets of regression models are estimated. The dependent variables in the regressions are five measures of performance related to plan trustworthiness: two related to deceptive practices and three to dimensions of quality that are largely hidden from enrollees. The first set (baseline) models relate plan ownership to trustworthy practices, controlling for other characteristics of the plan, the marketplace for health insurance, and the physician respondents. The second (interactive) set of models examines how the magnitude of ownership-related differences in trustworthiness varies with the market share of nonprofit plans in each community. DATA COLLECTION: The 1998 SMS was fielded between April and September of 1998 by Westat Inc. The average time required for a completed interview was approximately 30 minutes. The overall response rate was 52.2 percent. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Compared with more local nonprofit plans, for-profit plans affiliated with multistate corporations are consistently reported by their affiliated physicians to engage in practices associated with reduced trustworthiness. Nonprofit plans affiliated with multistate corporations have more physician-reported practices associated with trustworthiness than do for-profit corporate plans on four of five outcomes, but appear less trustworthy than locally controlled nonprofits on two of the five measures. The magnitude of these ownership-related differences declines as the market share of nonprofit plans rises: for two of the five measures, ownership-related differences in practices related to trustworthiness are entirely eliminated when the nonprofits enroll more than 30 percent of the local market. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of for-profit ownership and multistate corporate control appears to consistently and substantially reduce physician-reported measures related to the trustworthiness of health plans. Because this is the fastest growing form of managed care, these results raise concerns about further erosion of trust in American health care. Preserving a substantial market niche for nonprofit plans appears to reduce this erosion and should be considered by policymakers as a strategy for restoring trust in the health care system.

Association between outpatient visits following hospital discharge and readmissions among Medicare beneficiaries with atrial fibrillation and other chronic conditions.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) afflicts nearly 3 million people in the United States annually, the large majority of whom are Medicare beneficiaries with other chronic illnesses. Beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions have high hospitalization and readmission rates but evidence on factors associated with readmissions is limited, and little is known about differences in rates between beneficiaries with and without AF. In a retrospective analysis of Medicare claims data, the relationship between outpatient visits within 14 days after hospital discharge and readmission was examined for beneficiaries with AF or other chronic conditions. About half of those beneficiaries with a hospitalization had an outpatient visit within 14 days of discharge. Readmission rates were 11% to 24% lower for beneficiaries with an outpatient visit than for those without one (P < .01). These findings suggest that follow-up care shortly after discharge may lower readmissions for patients with AF or other chronic conditions.