Association of non-English language preference with postoperative hospital visits among California Medicaid enrollees.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-English language preference encounter language barriers across phases of surgical care. Patients with a non-English language preference represent 35% of California households and are disproportionately insured by Medicaid. To determine whether language predicts surgical outcomes, we investigated the association of patient non-English language preference with postoperative emergency department visits and readmissions among California Medicaid enrollees. METHODS: Our retrospective analysis of adult Medicaid enrollees undergoing 1 of 10 common inpatient operations using California hospital administrative data (2016-2019) modeled the association between non-English language preference and 30-day postoperative emergency department visits and readmissions using mixed effects logistic regression with hospital random intercept, adjusting for patient, operation, hospital, and community characteristics. Secondary analyses stratified by operation urgency and by insurance type in an all-payor cohort. RESULTS: Of 115,527 Medicaid enrollees, 17.2% had non-English language preference (n = 19,881), 66% were female (n = 73,653), and 40% were Hispanic/Latino (n = 45,541). Patients with non-English language preference experienced fewer postoperative emergency department visits (non-English language preference: 13.5%, English preference: 17.9%, P < .001) and readmissions (non-English language preference: 7.5%, English preference: 8.5%, P < .001), which persisted in adjusted models (adjusted odds ratio emergency department, 0.80, 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.85; readmissions: adjusted odds ratio, 0.86, 95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.92). Non-English language preference was associated with fewer emergency department visits after elective (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.88) and urgent/emergent surgery (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.85) but not readmissions after elective surgery (adjusted odds ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.01). This pattern was only observed for Medicaid and not other insurance types. CONCLUSION: Patients with non-English language preference who receive Medicaid have fewer postoperative emergency department visits and readmissions, even after urgent surgery. Our findings suggest that patterns of health care seeking after surgery vary by patient language, and investigating explanatory mechanisms is needed.

Limitations With California Medicaid Data for Palliative and End of Life Care Quality Measures.

In 2014 the California legislature passed Senate Bill 1004 (SB 1004) that was designed to expand access to specialty palliative care for individuals served by California's Medicaid (known as Medi-Cal) Managed Care Plans (MCPs). The California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) operationalized the legislation by developing minimum requirements for palliative care programs that all MCPs must meet or exceed.7 Quality and utilization data specific to California's Medicaid population are needed for stakeholders to identify care deficiencies and disparities, describe the end of life experience and utilization patterns of MCP members, compare these patterns to Medicare beneficiaries or other populations, and set appropriate targets to help monitor progress. We evaluated the feasibility of using Medicaid claims data and encounter data either by partnering with MCPs or by obtaining statewide data from DHCS to measure the quality of palliative care and end of life care. In a concurrent but separate effort, we analyzed administrative data supplied by three MCPs as part of a prospective pilot of standards for home-based palliative care in California, including care delivered to Medicaid beneficiaries under SB 1004. Beyond the practical challenges of allowing time for data access and approvals, both projects revealed several limitations to using administrative data to assess quality of palliative and end of life care for a Medicaid population. We describe these challenges that undermined our confidence in analysis results and propose solutions to measuring the quality of palliative and end of life care for Medicaid patients and suggested next steps.

Association between physician age and patterns of end-of-life care among older Americans.

BACKGROUND: End-of-life (EOL) care patterns may differ by physician age given differences in how physicians are trained or changes associated with aging. We sought to compare patterns of EOL care delivered to older Americans according to physician age. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of a 20% sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥66 years who died in 2016-2019 (n = 487,293). We attributed beneficiaries to the physician who had >50% of primary care visits during the last 6 months of life. We compared beneficiary-level outcomes by physician age (<40, 40-49, 50-59, or ≥60) in two areas: (1) advance care planning (ACP) and palliative care; and (2) high-intensity care at the EOL. RESULTS: Beneficiaries attributed to younger physicians had slightly higher proportions of billed ACP (adjusted proportions, 17.1%, 16.1%, 15.5%, and 14.0% for physicians aged <40, 40-49, 50-59, and ≥60, respectively; p-for-trend adjusted for multiple comparisons <0.001) and palliative care counseling or hospice use in the last 180 days of life (64.5%, 63.6%, 61.9%, and 60.8%; p-for-trend <0.001). Similarly, physicians' younger age was associated with slightly lower proportions of emergency department visits (57.4%, 57.0%, 57.4%, and 58.1%; p-for-trend <0.001), hospital admissions (51.2%, 51.1%, 51.4%, and 52.1%; p-for-trend <0.001), intensive care unit admissions (27.8%, 27.9%, 28.2%, and 28.3%; p-for-trend = 0.03), or mechanical ventilation or cardiopulmonary resuscitation (14.2, 14.9%, 15.2%, and 15.3%; p-for-trend <0.001) in the last 30 days of life, and in-hospital death (20.2%, 20.6%, 21.3%, and 21.5%; p-for-trend <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found that differences in patterns of EOL care between beneficiaries cared for by younger and older physicians were small, and thus, not clinically meaningful. Future research is warranted to understand the factors that can influence patterns of EOL care provided by physicians, including initial and continuing medical education.

Identifying vulnerable populations with symptomatic cholelithiasis at risk for increased health care utilization.

BACKGROUND: Gallstones are a common problem in the United States with many patients suffering from symptomatic cholelithiasis (SC). Patients with SC may first present to the emergency department ED) and are often discharged for elective follow-up; however, it is unknown what system and patient factors are associated with increased risk for ED revisits. This study aimed to assess longitudinal ED utilization and cholecystectomy for patients with SC and identify patient, geographic, and hospital characteristics associated with ED revisits, specifically race/ethnicity and insurance status. METHODS: Patients discharged from the ED with SC between July 1, 2016, and December 31, 2017, were identified from California administrative databases and followed for 1 year. Emergency department revisits and cholecystectomy after discharge were examined using logistic regression, clustering standard errors by hospital. Models adjusted for patient, geographic, and hospital variables using census and hospital administrative data. RESULTS: Cohort included 34,427 patients who presented to the ED with SC and were discharged. There were 18.8% of the patients that had one or more biliary-related ED revisits within 1 year. In fully adjusted models, non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds for any ED revisit (adjusted odds ratio 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.39) and for two more ED revisits (adjusted odds ratio 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.82). Insurance type was also associated with ED revisits. CONCLUSION: Non-Hispanic Black patients experienced higher utilization of health care resources for SC after adjusting for other patient, geographic and hospital variables. Strategies to mitigate these disparities may include the development of standardized protocols regarding the follow-up and education for SC. Implementation of such strategies can ensure equitable treatment for all patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Delay to Surgery for Patients with Symptomatic Cholelithiasis: Retrospective Analysis of an Administrative California Database after Discharge from the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Timely receipt of surgery should be available for all patients. Few studies have examined differences in the treatment of symptomatic cholelithiasis (SC), a common surgical problem, based on race/ethnicity or insurance status. This study aimed to identify differences in repeat emergency department (ED) use and wait time to cholecystectomy for SC. STUDY DESIGN: Patients discharged from the ED with SC between July 1, 2016, and December 31, 2017, were identified from California administrative databases and followed for 1 year. Repeat ED use and wait time to elective and nonelective cholecystectomy after ED discharge were examined using logistic and negative binomial regression models. RESULTS: The final cohort analyzed 13,596 patients who underwent cholecystectomy within 1 year from index ED visit for SC. In adjusted analysis, non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds for repeat ED use for biliary-related conditions before elective surgery and experienced longer waits for cholecystectomy (across several measures of wait times) compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Similar findings were seen for Medicaid and self-pay compared with privately insured patients. For example, self-pay patients had more than double the odds of experiencing repeat ED use while waiting for elective cholecystectomy compared with privately insured patients (adjusted odds ratio 2.49, 95% CI 1.88-3.31). CONCLUSION: Patients with SC receiving cholecystectomy within 1 year from index ED visit were more likely to have repeat ED use and longer waits to surgery based on their race/ethnicity and insurance status, even after adjusting for other measures of access. We identify a vulnerable population at risk for differences in treatment for a common surgical pathology.

The cost of comorbidities in treatment for HIV/AIDS in California.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy has increased longevity for people living with HIV (PLWH). As a result, PLWH increasingly experience the common diseases of aging and the resources needed to manage these comorbidities are increasing. This paper characterizes the number and types of comorbidities diagnosed among PLWH covered by Medicare and examines how non-HIV comorbidities relate to outpatient, inpatient, and pharmaceutical expenditures. METHODS: The study examined Medicare expenditures for 9767 HIV-positive Californians enrolled in Medicare in 2010 (7208 persons dually covered by Medicare and Medicaid and 2559 with Medicare only). Costs included both out of pocket costs and those paid by Medicare and Medicaid. Comorbidities were determined by examining diagnosis codes. FINDINGS: Medicare expenditures for Californians with HIV averaged $47,036 in 2010, with drugs accounting for about 2/3 of the total and outpatient costs 19% of the total. Inpatient costs accounted for 18% of the total. About 64% of the sample had at least one comorbidity in addition to HIV. Cross-validation showed that adding information on comorbidities to the quantile regression improved the accuracy of predicted individual expenditures. Non-HIV comorbidities relating to health habits-diabetes, hypertension, liver disease (hepatitis C), renal insufficiency-are common among PLWH. Cancer was relatively rare, but added significantly to cost. Comorbidities had little effect on pharmaceutical costs, which were dominated by the cost of antiretroviral therapy, but had a major effect on hospital admission. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities are prevalent among PLWH and add substantially to treatment costs for PLWH. Many of these comorbidities relate to health habits that could be addressed with additional prevention in ambulatory care, thereby improving health outcomes and ultimately reducing costs.

Public Reporting of Hospital-Level Cancer Surgical Volumes in California: An Opportunity to Inform Decision Making and Improve Quality.

PURPOSE: Most patients, providers, and payers make decisions about cancer hospitals without any objective data regarding quality or outcomes. We developed two online resources allowing users to search and compare timely data regarding hospital cancer surgery volumes. METHODS: Hospital cancer surgery volumes for all California hospitals were calculated using ICD-9 coded hospital discharge summary data. Cancer surgeries included (bladder, brain, breast, colon, esophagus, liver, lung, pancreas, prostate, rectum, and stomach) were selected on the basis of a rigorous literature review to confirm sufficient evidence of a positive association between volume and mortality. The literature could not identify threshold numbers of surgeries associated with better or worse outcomes. A multidisciplinary working group oversaw the project and ensured sound methodology. RESULTS: In California in 2014, about 60% of surgeries were performed at top-quintile-volume hospitals, but the per-hospital median numbers of surgeries for esophageal, pancreatic, stomach, liver, or bladder cancer surgeries were four or fewer. At least 670 patients received cancer surgery at hospitals that performed only one or two surgeries for a particular cancer type; 72% of those patients lived within 50 miles of a top-quintile-volume hospital. CONCLUSION: There is clear potential for more readily available information about hospital volumes to help patient, providers, and payers choose cancer surgery hospitals. Our successful public reporting of hospital volumes in California represents an important first step toward making publicly available even more provider-specific data regarding cancer care quality, costs, and outcomes, so those data can inform decision-making and encourage quality improvement.

Using Both Clinical Registry and Administrative Claims Data to Measure Risk-adjusted Surgical Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity of hybrid quality measures that use both clinical registry and administrative claims data, capitalizing on the strengths of each data source. BACKGROUND: Previous studies demonstrate substantial disagreement between clinical registry and administrative claims data on the occurrence of postoperative complications. Clinical data have greater validity than claims data for quality measurement but can be burdensome for hospitals to collect. METHODS: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program records were linked to Medicare inpatient claims (2005-2008). National Quality Forum-endorsed risk-adjusted measures of 30-day postoperative complications or death assessed hospital quality for patients undergoing colectomy, lower extremity bypass, or all surgical procedures. Measures use hierarchical multivariable logistic regression to identify statistical outliers. Measures were applied using clinical data, claims data, or a hybrid of both data sources. Kappa statistics assessed agreement on determinations of hospital quality. RESULTS: A total of 111,984 patients participated from 206 hospitals. Agreement on hospital quality between clinical and claims data was poor. Hybrid models using claims data to risk-adjust complications identified by clinical data had moderate agreement with all clinical data models, whereas hybrid models using clinical data to risk-adjust complications identified by claims data had routinely poor agreement with all clinical data models. CONCLUSIONS: Assessments of hospital quality differ substantially when using clinical registry versus administrative claims data. A hybrid approach using claims data for risk adjustment and clinical data for complications may be a valid alternative with lower data collection burden. For quality measures focused on postoperative complications to be meaningful, such policies should require, at a minimum, collection of clinical outcomes data.

Variation in Hospital Use of Postacute Care After Surgery and the Association With Care Quality.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about hospital use of postacute care after surgery and whether it is related to measures of surgical quality. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used data merged between a national surgery registry, Medicare inpatient claims, the Area Resource File, and the American Hospital Association Annual Survey (2005-2008). Using bivariate and multivariate analyses, we calculated hospital-level, risk-adjusted rates of postacute care use for both inpatient facilities (IF) and home health care (HHC), and examined the association of these rates with hospital quality measures, including mortality, complications, readmissions, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 112,620 patients treated at 217 hospitals, 18.6% were discharged to an IF, and 19.9% were discharged with HHC. Even after adjusting for differences in patient and hospital characteristics, hospitals varied widely in their use of both IF (mean, 20.3%; range, 2.7%-39.7%) and HHC (mean, 22.3%; range, 3.1%-57.8%). A hospital's risk-adjusted postoperative mortality rate or complication rate was not significantly associated with its use of postacute care, but higher 30-day readmission rates were associated with higher use of IF (24.1% vs. 21.2%, P=0.03). Hospitals with longer average length of stay used IF less frequently (19.4% vs. 24.4%, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals vary widely in their use of postacute care. Although hospital use of postacute care was not associated with risk-adjusted complication or mortality rates, hospitals with high readmission rates and shorter lengths of stay used inpatient postacute care more frequently. To reduce variations in care, better criteria are needed to identify which patients benefit most from these services.

Improving Hospital Reporting of Patient Race and Ethnicity--Approaches to Data Auditing.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate new metrics to improve the reporting of patient race and ethnicity (R/E) by hospitals. DATA SOURCES: California Patient Discharge Database (PDD) and birth registry, 2008-2009, Healthcare and Cost Utilization Project's State Inpatient Database, 2008-2011, cancer registry 2000-2008, and 2010 US Census Summary File 2. STUDY DESIGN: We examined agreement between hospital reported R/E versus self-report among mothers delivering babies and a cancer cohort in California. Metrics were created to measure root mean squared differences (RMSD) by hospital between reported R/E distribution and R/E estimates using R/E distribution within each patient's zip code of residence. RMSD comparisons were made to corresponding "gold standard" facility-level measures within the maternal cohort for California and six comparison states. DATA COLLECTION: Maternal birth hospitalization (linked to the state birth registry) and cancer cohort records linked to preceding and subsequent hospitalizations. Hospital discharges were linked to the corresponding Census zip code tabulation area using patient zip code. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Overall agreement between the PDD and the gold standard for the maternal cohort was 86 percent for the combined R/E measure and 71 percent for race alone. The RMSD measure is modestly correlated with the summary level gold standard measure for R/E (r = 0.44). The RMSD metric revealed general improvement in data agreement and completeness across states. "Other" and "unknown" categories were inconsistently applied within inpatient databases. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison between reported R/E and R/E estimates using zip code level data may be a reasonable first approach to evaluate and track hospital R/E reporting. Further work should focus on using more granular geocoded data for estimates and tracking data to improve hospital collection of R/E data.

Relationship Between Hospital Performance on a Patient Satisfaction Survey and Surgical Quality.

IMPORTANCE: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services include patient experience as a core component of its Value-Based Purchasing program, which ties financial incentives to hospital performance on a range of quality measures. However, it remains unclear whether patient satisfaction is an accurate marker of high-quality surgical care. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether hospital performance on a patient satisfaction survey is associated with objective measures of surgical quality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective observational study of participating American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS NSQIP) hospitals. We used data from a linked database of Medicare inpatient claims, ACS NSQIP, the American Hospital Association annual survey, and Hospital Compare from December 2, 2004, through December 31, 2008. A total of 103 866 patients older than 65 years undergoing inpatient surgery were included. Hospitals were grouped by quartile based on their performance on the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey. Controlling for preoperative risk factors, we created hierarchical logistic regression models to predict the occurrence of adverse postoperative outcomes based on a hospital's patient satisfaction scores. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Thirty-day postoperative mortality, major and minor complications, failure to rescue, and hospital readmission. RESULTS: Of the 180 hospitals, the overall mean patient satisfaction score was 68.0% (first quartile mean, 58.7%; fourth quartile mean, 76.7%). Compared with patients treated at hospitals in the lowest quartile, those at the highest quartile had significantly lower risk-adjusted odds of death (odds ratio = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99), failure to rescue (odds ratio = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70-0.96), and minor complication (odds ratio = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99). This translated to relative risk reductions of 11.1% (P = .04), 12.6% (P = .02), and 11.5% (P = .04), respectively. No significant relationship was noted between patient satisfaction and either major complication or hospital readmission. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Using a national sample of hospitals, we demonstrated a significant association between patient satisfaction scores and several objective measures of surgical quality. Our findings suggest that payment policies that incentivize better patient experience do not require hospitals to sacrifice performance on other quality measures.

Which Patients Require More Care after Hospital Discharge? An Analysis of Post-Acute Care Use among Elderly Patients Undergoing Elective Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The use of post-acute care is common among the elderly and accounts for $62 billion in annual Medicare expenditures. However, little is known about post-acute care use after surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Data were merged between the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) and Medicare claims for 2005 to 2008. Post-acute care use, including skilled nursing facilities (SNF), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRF), and home health care (HHC) were analyzed for 3 operations: colectomy, pancreatectomy, and open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Controlling for both preoperative risk factors and the occurrence of postoperative complications, we used multinomial logistic regression to estimate the odds of use for each type of post-acute care after elective surgery compared with home discharge. RESULTS: Post-acute care was used frequently for patients undergoing colectomy (40.0%; total n=10,932), pancreatectomy (46.0%; total n=2,144), and open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair (44.9%; total n=1,736). Home health was the most frequently reported post-acute care service for each operation (range 23.2% to 31.5%) followed by SNF (range 12.0% to 15.0%), and then by IRF (range 2.5% to 5.4%). The majority of patients with at least 1 inpatient complication were discharged to post-acute care (range 58.6% for open AAA repair to 64.4% for colectomy). In multivariable analysis, specific preoperative risk factors, including advanced age, poor functional status, and inpatient complications were significantly associated with increased risk-adjusted odds of discharge to post-acute care for each operation studied. CONCLUSIONS: Among elderly patients, post-acute care use is frequent after surgery and is significantly associated with several preoperative risk factors and postoperative inpatient complications. Further work is needed to ensure that post-acute care services are used appropriately and cost-effectively.

Extending the value of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program claims dataset to study long-term outcomes: Rate of repeat ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Existing large clinical registries capture short-term follow-up. Yet, there are many important long-term outcomes in surgery, such as recurrence of a ventral hernia after ventral hernia repair. The goal of the current study was to conduct an exploratory analysis to determine whether the rates, timing, and risk factors for ventral hernia re-repair in claims data linked to registry data were consistent with the known clinical literature. STUDY DESIGN: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) and Medicare inpatient claims linked data set from 2005 to 2008 was queried to identify ventral hernia re-repairs after index ventral hernia repairs. Survival analysis was used to examine the ventral hernia re-repair rate over time and to quantify the relationship with clinical variables. RESULTS: Of 3,730 index ventral hernia repairs identified in ACS-NSQIP, 247 patients (6.6%) underwent re-repair of a ventral hernia during the study period (2005-2008) in the Medicare claims data. ACS-NSQIP clinical variables that were associated with the ventral hernia re-repair rate in Medicare claims data 1 year after index ventral hernia repair were being a smoker (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.70, P = .02), body mass index (HR = 1.16, P = .04), and postoperative superficial surgical-site infection (HR = 2.88, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Long-term rate and timing of ventral hernia re-repair obtained from claims data were an underestimate compared with clinical studies. Yet, several known clinical risk factors for recurrence in the clinical registry were associated with the re-repair rate in claims data at one year. It may be possible to study certain long-term outcomes using selected reoperation rates using the technique of linked clinical registry-claims data, with an understanding that event rates are conservative estimates.

Comparison between clinical registry and medicare claims data on the classification of hospital quality of surgical care.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the classification of hospital statistical outlier status as better or worse performance than expected for postoperative complications using Medicare claims versus clinical registry data. BACKGROUND: Controversy remains as to the most favorable data source for measuring postoperative complications for pay-for-performance and public reporting polices. METHODS: Patient-level records (2005-2008) were linked between the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) and Medicare inpatient claims. Hospital statistical outlier status for better or worse performance than expected was assessed using each data source for superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep/organ-space SSI, any SSI, urinary tract infection, pneumonia, sepsis, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous thromboembolism, and myocardial infarction by developing hierarchical multivariable logistic regression models. Kappa statistics and correlation coefficients assessed agreement between the data sources. RESULTS: A total of 192 hospitals with 110,987 surgical patients were included. Agreement on hospital rank for complication rates between Medicare claims and ACS-NSQIP was poor-to-moderate (weighted κ: 0.18-0.48). Of hospitals identified as statistical outliers for better or worse performance by Medicare claims, 26% were also identified as outliers by ACS-NSQIP. Of outliers identified by ACS-NSQIP, 16% were also identified as outliers by Medicare claims. Agreement between the data sources on hospital outlier status classification was uniformly poor (weighted κ: -0.02-0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Despite using the same statistical methodology with each data source, classification of hospital outlier status as better or worse performance than expected for postoperative complications differed substantially between ACS-NSQIP and Medicare claims.

Hospital costs by cost center of inpatient hospitalization for medicare patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to describe the magnitude of hospital costs among patients undergoing elective colectomy, cholecystectomy, and pancreatectomy, determine whether these costs relate as expected to duration of care, patient case-mix severity and comorbidities, and whether risk-adjusted costs vary significantly by hospital. Correctly estimating the cost of production of surgical care may help decision makers design mechanisms to improve the efficiency of surgical care. STUDY DESIGN: Patient data from 202 hospitals in the ACS-NSQIP were linked to Medicare inpatient claims. Patient charges were mapped to cost center cost-to-charge ratios in the Medicare cost reports to estimate costs. The association of patient case-mix severity and comorbidities with cost was analyzed using mixed effects multivariate regression. Cost variation among hospitals was quantified by estimating risk-adjusted hospital cost ratios and 95% confidence intervals from the mixed effects multivariate regression. RESULTS: There were 21,923 patients from 202 hospitals who underwent an elective colectomy (n = 13,945), cholecystectomy (n = 5,569), or pancreatectomy (n = 2,409). Median cost was lowest for cholecystectomy ($15,651) and highest for pancreatectomy ($37,745). Room and board costs accounted for the largest proportion (49%) of costs and were correlated with length of stay, R = 0.89, p < 0.001. The patient case-mix severity and comorbidity variables most associated with cost were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class IV (estimate 1.72, 95% CI 1.57 to 1.87) and fully dependent functional status (estimate 1.63, 95% CI 1.53 to 1.74). After risk-adjustment, 66 hospitals had significantly lower costs than the average hospital and 57 hospitals had significantly higher costs. CONCLUSIONS: The hospital costs estimates appear to be consistent with clinical expectations of hospital resource use and differ significantly among 202 hospitals after risk-adjustment for preoperative patient characteristics and procedure type.

Is there hospital variation in long-term incisional hernia repair after abdominal surgery?

BACKGROUND: Currently, hospital benchmarking organizations are often limited to short-term surgical quality comparisons among hospitals. The goal of this study was to determine whether long-term rates of incisional hernia repair after common abdominal operations could be used to compare hospital long-term surgical quality. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cohort study with up to 4 years of follow-up. Patients who underwent 1 of 5 common inpatient abdominal operations were identified in 2005-2008 American College of Surgeons NSQIP data linked to Medicare inpatient records. The main outcomes included occurrence of an incisional hernia repair. A multivariable, shared frailty Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare each hospital's incisional hernia rate with the overall mean rate for all hospitals and control for American College of Surgeons NSQIP preoperative clinical variables. RESULTS: A total of 37,134 patients underwent 1 of 5 common inpatient abdominal operations, including colectomy, small bowel resection, ventral hernia repair, pancreatic resection, or cholecystectomy, at 1 of 216 hospitals participating in American College of Surgeons NSQIP during the 4-year period. There were 1,474 (4.0%) patients who underwent an incisional hernia repair, at a median follow-up time of 16 months (interquartile range 8 to 25 months) after initial abdominal surgery. After risk adjustment, there was no significant difference in the ratio of any one hospital's adjusted hazard rate for incisional hernia repair vs the average hospital adjusted hazard rate. CONCLUSIONS: Risk-adjusted hospital rates of incisional hernia repair do not vary significantly from the average. This suggests that incisional hernia repair might not be sensitive enough as a long-term quality metric for benchmarking hospital performance.

Measuring risk-adjusted value using Medicare and ACS-NSQIP: is high-quality, low-cost surgical care achievable everywhere?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between risk-adjusted cost and quality for colectomy procedures and to identify characteristics of "high value" hospitals (high quality, low cost). BACKGROUND: Policymakers are currently focused on rewarding high-value health care. Hospitals will increasingly be held accountable for both quality and cost. METHODS: Records (2005-2008) for all patients undergoing colectomy procedures in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) were linked to Medicare inpatient claims. Cost was derived from hospital payments by Medicare. Quality was derived from the occurrence of 30-day postoperative major complications and/or death as recorded in ACS-NSQIP. Risk-adjusted cost and quality metrics were developed using hierarchical multivariable modeling, consistent with a National Quality Forum-endorsed colectomy measure. RESULTS: The study population included 14,745 colectomy patients in 169 hospitals. Average hospitalization cost was $21,350 (SD $20,773, median $16,092, interquartile range $14,341-$24,598). Thirty-four percent of patients had a postoperative complication and/or death. Higher hospital quality was significantly correlated with lower cost (correlation coefficient 0.38, P < 0.001). Among hospitals classified as high quality, 52% were found to be low cost (representing highest value hospitals) whereas 14% were high cost (P = 0.001). Forty-one percent of low-quality hospitals were high cost. Highest "value" hospitals represented a mix of teaching/nonteaching affiliation, small/large bed sizes, and regional locations. CONCLUSIONS: Using national ACS-NSQIP and Medicare data, this study reports an association between higher quality and lower cost surgical care. These results suggest that high-value surgical care is being delivered in a wide spectrum of hospitals and hospital types.

The impact of continuous Medicaid enrollment on diagnosis, treatment, and survival in six surgical cancers.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of Medicaid enrollment on the diagnosis, treatment, and survival of six surgically relevant cancers among poor and underserved Californians. DATA SOURCES: California Cancer Registry (CCR), California's Patient Discharge Database (PDD), and state Medicaid enrollment files between 2002 and 2008. STUDY DESIGN: We linked clinical and administrative records to differentiate patients continuously enrolled in Medicaid from those receiving coverage at the time of their cancer diagnosis. We developed multivariate logistic regression models to predict death within 1 year for each cancer after controlling for sociodemographic and clinical variables. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: All incident cases of six cancers (colon, esophageal, lung, pancreas, stomach, and ovarian) were identified from CCR. CCR records were linked to hospitalizations (PDD) and monthly Medicaid enrollment. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Continuous enrollment in Medicaid for at least 6 months prior to diagnosis improves survival in three surgically relevant cancers. Discontinuous Medicaid patients have higher stage tumors, undergo fewer definitive operations, and are more likely to die even after risk adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Expansion of continuous insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act is likely to improve both access and clinical outcomes for cancer patients in California.

Are procedures codes in claims data a reliable indicator of intraoperative splenic injury compared with clinical registry data?

BACKGROUND: Identifying iatrogenic injuries using existing data sources is important for improved transparency in the occurrence of intraoperative events. There is evidence that procedure codes are reliably recorded in claims data. The objective of this study was to assess whether concurrent splenic procedure codes in patients undergoing colectomy procedures are reliably coded in claims data as compared with clinical registry data. STUDY DESIGN: Patients who underwent colectomy procedures in the absence of neoplastic diagnosis codes were identified from American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP data linked with Medicare inpatient claims data file (2005 to 2008). A κ statistic was used to assess coding concordance between ACS NSQIP and Medicare inpatient claims, with ACS NSQIP serving as the reference standard. RESULTS: A total of 11,367 colectomy patients were identified from 212 hospitals. There were 114 patients (1%) who had a concurrent splenic procedure code recorded in either ACS NSQIP or Medicare inpatient claims. There were 7 patients who had a splenic injury diagnosis code recorded in either data source. Agreement of splenic procedure codes between the data sources was substantial (κ statistic 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64-0.79). Medicare inpatient claims identified 81% of the splenic procedure codes recorded in ACS NSQIP, and 99% of the patients without a splenic procedure code. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to use Medicare claims data to identify splenic injuries occurring during colectomy procedures, as claims data have moderate sensitivity and excellent specificity for capturing concurrent splenic procedure codes compared with ACS NSQIP.

Identification of modifiable factors for reducing readmission after colectomy: a national analysis.

BACKGROUND: Rates of hospital readmission are currently used for public reporting and pay for performance. Colectomy procedures account for a large number of readmissions among operative procedures. Our objective was to compare the importance of 3 groups of clinical variables (demographics, preoperative risk factors, and postoperative complications) in predicting readmission after colectomy procedures. METHODS: Patient records (2005-2008) from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) were linked to Medicare inpatient claims. Patient demographics (n = 2), preoperative risk factors (n = 23), and 30-day postoperative complications (n = 17) were identified from ACS-NSQIP, whereas 30-day postoperative readmissions and costs were determined from Medicare. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine risk-adjusted predictors of colectomy readmission. RESULTS: Among 12,981 colectomy patients, the 30-day postoperative readmission rate was 13.5%. Readmitted patients had slightly greater rates of comorbidities and indicators of clinical severity and substantially greater rates of complications than non-readmitted patients. After risk adjustment, patients with a complication were 3.3 times as likely to be readmitted as patients without a complication. Among individual complications, progressive renal failure and organ-space surgical site infection had the highest risk-adjusted relative risks of readmission (4.6 and 4.0, respectively). Demographic, preoperative risk factor, and postoperative complication variables increased the ability to discriminate readmissions (reflected by the c-statistic) by 5.3%, 23.3%, and 35.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Postoperative complications after colectomy are more predictive of readmission than traditional risk factors. Focusing quality improvement efforts on preventing and managing postoperative complications may be the most important step toward reducing readmission rates.