Recommendations for Public Policy Changes to Improve Supportive Care for Seriously Ill Patients With Kidney Disease.

National and international nephrology organizations have identified substantial unmet supportive care needs of patients with kidney disease and issued recommendations. In the United States, the most recent comprehensive effort to change kidney care, the Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative, does not explicitly address supportive care needs, although it attempts to implement more patient-centered care. This Perspective from the leaders of the Coalition for Supportive Care of Kidney Patients advocates for urgent policy changes to improve patient-centered care and the quality of life of seriously ill patients with kidney disease. It argues for the provision of supportive care by an interdisciplinary team led by nephrology clinicians to improve shared decision-making, advance care planning, pain and symptom management, the explicit offering of active medical management without dialysis as an option for patients who may not benefit from dialysis, and the removal by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and all other payors of financial and regulatory disincentives to quality supportive care, including hospice, for patients with or approaching kidney failure. It also emphasizes that all educational and accreditation programs for nephrology clinicians include kidney supportive care and its essential role in the care of patients with kidney disease.

Addressing Critiques of the Proposed CMS Metric of Organ Procurement Organ Performance: More Data Isn't Better.

BACKGROUND: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has proposed a rule change to redefine the metric by which organ procurement organizations (OPOs) are evaluated. The metric relies on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data on inpatient deaths from causes consistent with donation among patients <75 years of age. Concerns have been raised that this metric does not account for rates of ventilation, and prevalence of cancer and severe sepsis, without objective data to substantiate or refute such concerns. METHODS: We estimated OPO-level donation rates using CDC data, and used Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality/Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data from 43 State Inpatient Databases to calculate "adjusted" donation rates. RESULTS: The CMS metric and the ventilation-adjusted CMS metric were highly concordant in absolute terms (Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients ≥0.95). In the Bland-Altman plot, 100% (48/48) of paired values (standard deviations [SDs] of the CMS and "ventilation adjusted" metrics) were within 1.96 SDs of the mean difference, with near-perfect correlation in Passing and Bablok regression (Lin's concordance correlation coefficient: 0.97). The CMS metric and the ventilation/cancer/sepsis-adjusted metric were highly concordant in absolute terms (Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients ≥0.94). In the Bland-Altman plot, 97.9% (47/48) of paired values (SDs of the CMS and "ventilation/cancer/sepsis adjusted" metrics) were within 1.96 SDs of the mean difference, with near-perfect correlation in the Passing and Bablok regression (Lin's concordance correlation coefficient: 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: These conclusions should provide CMS, and the transplant community, with comfort that the proposed CMS metric using CDC inpatient death data as a tool to compare OPO is not compromised by its lack of inclusion of ventilation or other comorbidity data.

Inaugural Readmission Penalties for Total Hip and Total Knee Arthroplasty Procedures Under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.

Importance: The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) is a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services policy that levies hospital reimbursement penalties based on excess readmissions of patients with 4 medical conditions and 3 surgical procedures. A greater understanding of factors associated with the 3 surgical reimbursement penalties is needed for clinicians in surgical practice. Objective: To investigate the first year of HRRP readmission penalties applied to 2 surgical procedures-elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA)-in the context of hospital and patient characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: Fiscal year 2015 HRRP penalization data from Hospital Compare were linked with the American Hospital Association Annual Survey and with the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database for hospitals in the state of Florida. By using a case-control framework, those hospitals were separated based on HRRP penalty severity, as measured with the HRRP THA and TKA excess readmission ratio, and compared according to orthopedic volume as well as hospital-level and patient-level characteristics. The first year of HRRP readmission penalties applied to surgery in Florida Medicare subsection (d) hospitals was examined, identifying 60 663 Medicare patients who underwent elective THA or TKA in 143 Florida hospitals. The data analysis was conducted from February 2016 to January 2017. Exposures: Annual hospital THA and TKA volume, other hospital-level characteristics, and patient factors used in HRRP risk adjustment. Main Outcomes and Measures: The HRRP penalties with HRRP excess readmission ratios were measured, and their association with annual THA and TKA volume, a common measure of surgical quality, was evaluated. The HRRP penalties for surgical care according to hospital and readmitted patient characteristics were then examined. Results: Among 143 Florida hospitals, 2991 of 60 663 Medicare patients (4.9%) who underwent THA or TKA were readmitted within 30 days. Annual hospital arthroplasty volume seemed to follow an inverse association with both unadjusted readmission rates (r = -0.16, P = .06) and HRRP risk-adjusted readmission penalties (r = -0.12, P = .14), but these associations were not statistically significant. Other hospital characteristics and readmitted patient characteristics were similar across HRRP orthopedic penalty severity. Conclusions and Relevance: This study's findings suggest that higher-volume hospitals had less severe, but not significantly different, rates of readmission and HRRP penalties, without systematic differences across readmitted patients.

Poor Performance Flagging Is Associated With Fewer Transplantations at Centers Flagged Multiple Times.

BACKGROUND: Lung transplantation outcomes are heavily scrutinized, given the high stakes of these operations, yet the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) method of using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) risk-adjusted outcomes to identify underperforming centers is controversial. We hypothesized that CMS flagging results in conservative behavior for recipient and organ selection, resulting in fewer patients added to the waitlist and fewer transplantations performed. METHODS: SRTR reports from July 2012 through July 2017 were included. Center characteristics were compared, stratified by number of flagging events. The impact of flagging for underperformance on risk aversion outcomes was analyzed using a mixed-effects regression model. RESULTS: A total of 72 centers had reported SRTR data during the study period. Of these, 21 centers (29%) met flagging criteria a median of 2 times (interquartile range, 1 to 4 times) for a total of 53 events. Flagging had no statistically significant impact on waitlist or transplantation volume and patient selection by mixed-effects modeling. Despite similar average expected 1-year survival (86.6% versus 87.7%, p = 0.27), centers that were flagged only once added more patients per year to the waitlist (16.3 patients versus 7.8 patients, p = 0.01) and performed more transplantations per year (28.4 transplantations versus 11.1 transplantations, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis defines center-level trends in lung transplantation after CMS flagging. Contrary to our primary hypothesis, flagging did not result in temporal center-level changes. However, programs on prolonged probation demonstrated reduced activity, which likely indicates a shift to higher performing centers.

The Unintended Impact of the Removal of Total Knee Arthroplasty From the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Inpatient-Only List.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was removed from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Inpatient-Only (IPO) list starting January 1, 2018. Many hospitals responded by instructing surgeons to schedule all TKAs as outpatient procedures, and some local Medicare Advantage contractors began to expect outpatient status for all or most TKA cases. This activity and ensuing confusion has caused considerable unintended disruption for surgeons, hospitals, and patients. The purpose of this study was to gauge the impact on providers and patients. METHODS: Active members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons were sent a 9-question survey asking if the surgeon's hospital was treating all patients undergoing TKA as outpatients and if Medicare Advantage administrators and commercial payers were treating all or most the same. Questions also inquired about the impact on surgeon practices and their patients. RESULTS: Seven hundred thirty members (26%) responded; of which, 59.5% reported that their hospitals have instructed them that all Medicare TKAs should be scheduled as outpatient procedures; 40.5% have been asked to use proscribed documentation to justify that change; 30.4% reported that their patients have incurred added personal cost secondary to their surgical procedure being billed as an outpatient procedure; and 76.1% report that this issue has become an administrative burden. CONCLUSION: The CMS clearly stated its expectation in the 2018 Outpatient Prospective Payment System Final Rule that the great majority of Medicare fee-for-service TKA patients would continue to be treated as inpatients. Nonetheless, many hospitals have decided to schedule all TKA cases as outpatients due to the 2-midnight rule despite a moratorium on recovery audits. It is the position of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons that the CMS needs to provide more specific expectations concerning the needed language justifying admission or exempt TKA from the 2-midnight rule to mitigate the unintended confusion demonstrated by hospitals and some payers that has resulted from the removal of TKA from the Inpatient-Only list.

Practice Transformation: Early Impact of the Oncology Care Model on Hospital Admissions.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the Oncology Care Model (OCM) is to improve quality and reduce cost through practice transformation. A foundational tenant is to reduce avoidable emergency room (ER) visits and hospitalizations. In anticipation of being an OCM participant, we instituted a multidimensional campaign designed to meet these objectives. METHODS: Prior actions included establishment of phone triage unit, after-hours and weekend calls, and institution of weekend urgent care. RESULTS: On the basis of data from the Chronic Condition Warehouse, as provided by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, we were successful at reducing the acute care admissions rate by 16%. During the baseline period extending from Jan 2016-Mar 2016, the hospital admission rate was 27 per patient, per quarter, at an average cost per admission event of $11,122, translating to an inpatient cost per patient, per quarter, of $3,003. In the year one reporting period of July 2016-July 2017, the hospital admission rate declined to 22.6 per patient, per quarter, at an average cost per admission event of $11,106, translating to an inpatient cost per patient, per quarter, of $2,505. OCM patient survey scores improved. In addition, at Oncology Hematology Care, we achieved improved results compared with the risk-adjusted national averages for the following measures: readmissions (4.9 v 5.6 per 100 patients, respectively), ER use (17 v 18.6 per 100 patients, respectively), and observation stays (2.7 v 3.6 per 100 patients, respectively). CONCLUSION: By implementing a cost-efficient, reproducible, and scalable campaign targeting ER avoidance and hospitalizations, we were able to decrease hospital admissions. Reported Medicare savings amounted to nearly $798,000 in inpatient cost per quarter over 1,600 patients.

Understanding the relationship between the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Hospital Compare star rating, surgical case volume, and short-term outcomes after major cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Both the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) Hospital Compare star rating and surgical case volume have been publicized as metrics that can help patients to identify high-quality hospitals for complex care such as cancer surgery. The current study evaluates the relationship between the CMS' star rating, surgical volume, and short-term outcomes after major cancer surgery. METHODS: National Medicare data were used to evaluate the relationship between hospital star ratings and cancer surgery volume quintiles. Then, multilevel logistic regression models were fit to examine the association between cancer surgery outcomes and both star rankings and surgical volumes. Lastly, a graphical approach was used to compare how well star ratings and surgical volume predicted cancer surgery outcomes. RESULTS: This study identified 365,752 patients undergoing major cancer surgery for 1 of 9 cancer types at 2,550 hospitals. Star rating was not associated with surgical volume (P < .001). However, both the star rating and surgical volume were correlated with 4 short-term cancer surgery outcomes (mortality, complication rate, readmissions, and prolonged length of stay). The adjusted predicted probabilities for 5- and 1-star hospitals were 2.3% and 4.5% for mortality, 39% and 48% for complications, 10% and 15% for readmissions, and 8% and 16% for a prolonged length of stay, respectively. The adjusted predicted probabilities for hospitals with the highest and lowest quintile cancer surgery volumes were 2.7% and 5.8% for mortality, 41% and 55% for complications, 12.2% and 11.6% for readmissions, and 9.4% and 13% for a prolonged length of stay, respectively. Furthermore, surgical volume and the star rating were similarly associated with mortality and complications, whereas the star rating was more highly associated with readmissions and prolonged length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of other information, these findings suggest that the star rating may be useful to patients when they are selecting a hospital for major cancer surgery. However, more research is needed before these ratings can supplant surgical volume as a measure of surgical quality. Cancer 2017;123:4259-4267. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

The association of Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stent Trial (CREST) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Carotid Guideline Publication on utilization and outcomes of carotid stenting among "high-risk" patients.

OBJECTIVE: Since the 2004 approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration of carotid artery stenting (CAS), there have been two seminal publications about CAS reimbursement (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines; 2008) and clinical outcomes (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stent Trial [CREST]; 2010). We explored the association between these publications and national trends in CAS use among high-risk symptomatic patients. METHODS: The most recent congruent data sets of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) were queried for patients undergoing carotid revascularization. The sample was limited to include only patients who were defined as "high-risk" if they had a Charlson Comorbidity Score of ≥3.0. Subgroup analyses were performed of high-risk patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. Utilization proportions of CAS were calculated quarterly from 2005 to 2011 for NIS. Three time intervals related to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines and CREST publication were selected: 2005 to 2008, 2008 to 2010, and after 2010. Logistic regression with piecewise linear trend for time was used to estimate different trends in CAS use for the overall high-risk sample and for neurologically asymptomatic and symptomatic cases. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare odds of postoperative mortality and stroke between these two procedures at different time intervals independent of confounding variables. RESULTS: During the study period, 20,079 carotid endarterectomies (CEAs) and 3447 CAS procedures were performed in high-risk patients in the NIS database. CAS utilization constituted 20.5% of carotid revascularization procedures among high-risk symptomatic patients, with a significant increase from 18.6% to 24.4% during the study period (P < .001). There was an initial increase during 2005 to 2008 in the rate of CAS compared with CEA, CAS utilization significantly decreased during 2008 to 2010 by a 3.3% decline in the odds ratio (OR) of CAS per quarter (OR, 0.967; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.943-0.993; P = .002), and after CREST (after 2010), CAS utilization continued to increase significantly from the prepublication to the postpublication time interval. The odds of in-hospital mortality (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.17-5.62; P = .019) and postoperative in-hospital stroke (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.09-3.68; P = .024) were independently and significantly higher for CAS patients in the overall sample. CONCLUSIONS: The use of CAS for carotid revascularization in a high-risk cohort of patients has significantly increased from 2005 to 2011. Compared with CEA, CAS independently increased the odds of perioperative in-hospital stroke in all high-risk patients and of in-hospital mortality in symptomatic high-risk patients.

Achieving the BpTRUth: emergency department hypertension screening and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services quality measure.

In 2012, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) instituted a Physician Quality Reporting System measure for screening and referring patients with elevated blood pressure (BP). The aims of this study were to (1) assess the reliability of ED triage BP as a metric to establish when the CMS threshold (≥120/80 mm Hg), and other clinically relevant BP thresholds (≥140/90 and ≥160/100 mm Hg) have been met, using BP measured with a highly accurate device (BpTRU) in the emergency department as the gold standard; and (2) determine whether correct identification varies by gender, race, or triage acuity. Using the BpTRU, we calculated the proportion of patients whose triage BP accurately indicated a need for further referral and treatment for hypertension according to three suggested BP thresholds (≥120/80, ≥140/90, and ≥160/100 mm Hg). Of 354 patients, the median age was 39 years, 48.9% were women, and 66.4% were White. At the three suggested BP thresholds (≥120/80, ≥140/90, and ≥160/100 mm Hg), 66.1%, 74.0%, and 88.8% of patients were confirmed to meet the CMS threshold, respectively. There were no differences by gender, race, or triage acuity. Emergency department triage BP would reliably identify elevated BP using the CMS threshold in up to two-thirds of those without known hypertension.

High Prevalence of Medication Discrepancies Between Home Health Referrals and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Home Health Certification and Plan of Care and Their Potential to Affect Safety of Vulnerable Elderly Adults.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of discrepancies between medication lists that referring providers and home healthcare (HH) nurses create. DESIGN: The active medication list from the hospital at time of HH initiation was compared with the HH agency's plan of care medication list. An electronic algorithm was developed to compare the two lists for discrepancies. SETTING: Single large hospital and HH agency in the western United States. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals referred for HH from the hospital in 2012 (N = 770, 96.3% male, median age 71). MEASUREMENTS: Prevalence was calculated for discrepancies, including medications missing from one list or the other and differences in dose, frequency, or route for medications contained on both lists. RESULTS: Participants had multiple medical problems (median 16 active problems) and were taking a median of 15 medications (range 1-93). Every participant had at least one discrepancy; 90.1% of HH lists were missing at least one medication that the referring provider had prescribed, 92.1% of HH lists contained medications not on the referring provider's list, 89.8% contained medication naming errors. 71.0% contained dosing discrepancies, and 76.3% contained frequency discrepancies. CONCLUSION: Discrepancies between HH and referring provider lists are common. Future work is needed to address possible safety and care coordination implications of discrepancies in this highly complex population.

The Cost and Outcome Effectiveness of Total Hip Replacement: Technique Choice and Volume-Output Effects Matter.

BACKGROUND: Total hip replacement (THR) must be managed in a more sustainable manner. More cost-effective surgical techniques and the centralization/regionalization of services are two solutions. The former requires an assessment of newer minimally invasive and muscle-sparing surgical techniques. The latter necessitates an effective volume-outcome (VO) relationship. Prior studies have failed to evaluate and control for the VO relation. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative cost and outcome effectiveness of two minimally invasive and one muscle-sparing techniques while evaluating and controlling for a potentially endogenous VO relation. METHODS: An all payer claims database for all THR performed in Maine in 2011 was used. The cost and outcome effectiveness of newer minimally invasive (modified Hardinge) and muscle-sparing (modified Watson-Jones) techniques were compared with the standard bearer posterior minimally invasive method. Using regression analysis, the outcomes analyzed were as follows: total costs, length of hospital stay, nursing care and home discharges, and use of physical therapy. Regression analysis was also used to evaluate and control for VO effects. RESULTS: (1) Newer muscle-sparing and minimally invasive approaches are substantially more effective; (2) irrespective of technique, higher volume surgeons are more effective; (3) technique-specific VO effects for more complex techniques exist and show substantial savings when yearly volume exceeds 30-50; and (4) the anterolateral muscle-sparing technique is accessible to the average surgeon. CONCLUSION: Reliance on newer surgical techniques and centralization/regionalization of THR services can reduce costs.