Association Between Hospital Participation in a Medicare Bundled Payment Initiative and Payments and Quality Outcomes for Lower Extremity Joint Replacement Episodes.

IMPORTANCE: Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) is a voluntary initiative of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to test the effect of holding an entity accountable for all services provided during an episode of care on episode payments and quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether BPCI was associated with a greater reduction in Medicare payments without loss of quality of care for lower extremity joint (primarily hip and knee) replacement episodes initiated in BPCI-participating hospitals that are accountable for total episode payments (for the hospitalization and Medicare-covered services during the 90 days after discharge). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A difference-in-differences approach estimated the differential change in outcomes for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who had a lower extremity joint replacement at a BPCI-participating hospital between the baseline (October 2011 through September 2012) and intervention (October 2013 through June 2015) periods and beneficiaries with the same surgical procedure at matched comparison hospitals. EXPOSURE: Lower extremity joint replacement at a BPCI-participating hospital. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Standardized Medicare-allowed payments (Medicare payments), utilization, and quality (unplanned readmissions, emergency department visits, and mortality) during hospitalization and the 90-day postdischarge period. RESULTS: There were 29 441 lower extremity joint replacement episodes in the baseline period and 31 700 in the intervention period (mean [SD] age, 74.1 [8.89] years; 65.2% women) at 176 BPCI-participating hospitals, compared with 29 440 episodes in the baseline period (768 hospitals) and 31 696 episodes in the intervention period (841 hospitals) (mean [SD] age, 74.1 [8.92] years; 64.9% women) at matched comparison hospitals. The BPCI mean Medicare episode payments were $30 551 (95% CI, $30 201 to $30 901) in the baseline period and declined by $3286 to $27 265 (95% CI, $26 838 to $27 692) in the intervention period. The comparison mean Medicare episode payments were $30 057 (95% CI, $29 765 to $30 350) in the baseline period and declined by $2119 to $27 938 (95% CI, $27 639 to $28 237). The mean Medicare episode payments declined by an estimated $1166 more (95% CI, -$1634 to -$699; P < .001) for BPCI episodes than for comparison episodes, primarily due to reduced use of institutional postacute care. There were no statistical differences in the claims-based quality measures, which included 30-day unplanned readmissions (-0.1%; 95% CI, -0.6% to 0.4%), 90-day unplanned readmissions (-0.4%; 95% CI, -1.1% to 0.3%), 30-day emergency department visits (-0.1%; 95% CI, -0.7% to 0.5%), 90-day emergency department visits (0.2%; 95% CI, -0.6% to 1.0%), 30-day postdischarge mortality (-0.1%; 95% CI, -0.3% to 0.2%), and 90-day postdischarge mortality (-0.0%; 95% CI, -0.3% to 0.3%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the first 21 months of the BPCI initiative, Medicare payments declined more for lower extremity joint replacement episodes provided in BPCI-participating hospitals than for those provided in comparison hospitals, without a significant change in quality outcomes. Further studies are needed to assess longer-term follow-up as well as patterns for other types of clinical care.

Medicare post-acute care episodes and payment bundling.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this paper is to examine service use in an episode of acute and post-acute care (PAC) under alternative episode definitions and to look at geographic differences in episode payments. DATA AND METHODS: The data source for these analyses was a Medicare claims file for 30 percent of beneficiaries with an acute hospital initiated episode in 2008 (N = 1,705,794, of which 38.7 percent went on to use PAC). Fixed length episodes of 30, 60, and 90 days were examined. Analyses examined differences in definitions allowing any claim within the fixed length period to be part of the episode versus prorating a claim extending past the episode endpoint. Readmissions were also examined as an episode endpoint. Payments were standardized to allow for comparison of episode payments per acute hospital discharge or PAC user across states. RESULTS: The results of these analyses provide information on the composition of service use under different episode definitions and highlight considerations for providers and payers testing different alternatives for bundled payment.

Improving quality assessment through multilevel modeling: the case of nursing home compare.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate how multilevel modeling and empirical Bayes (EB) estimates can improve Medicare's Nursing Home Compare quality measures (QMs). DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Secondary data from July 1 to September 30, 2004. Facility-level QMs were estimated from minimum data set (MDS) assessments for approximately 31,000 Minnesota nursing home residents in 393 facilities. STUDY DESIGN: Prevalence and incidence rates for 12 nursing facility QMs (e.g., use of physical restraints, pressure sores, and weight loss) were estimated with EB methods and risk adjustment using a hierarchical general linear model. Three sets of rates were developed: Nursing Home Compare's current method, unadjusted EB rates, and risk-adjusted EB rates. Bayesian 90 percent credibility intervals (CIs) were constructed around EB rates, and these were used to flag facilities for potential quality of care problems. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: MDS assessments were performed by nursing facility staff, transmitted electronically to the Minnesota Department of Health, and provided to the investigators. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Facility rates and rankings for the 12 QMs differed substantially using the multilevel models compared with current methods. The EB estimated rates shrank considerably toward the population mean. Risk adjustment had a large impact on some QM rates and a more modest impact on others. When EB CIs were used to flag problem facilities, there was wide variation across QMs in the percentage of facilities flagged. CONCLUSIONS: Multilevel modeling should be applied to Nursing Home Compare and more widely in other health care quality assessment systems.

Variations on a theme called PACE.

BACKGROUND: The Program for All-inclusive Care of the Elderly (PACE) has been hailed as successful but of limited appeal. This study contrasts the effects on hospital utilization of PACE and a more liberal variant, the Wisconsin Partnership Program (WPP). METHODS: Hospital and emergency room (ER) utilization data from two sites that used both PACE and WPP to serve elderly clients were compared. The analysis of utilization was conducted using a cross-sectional longitudinal approach. The statistical significance of the difference between WPP and PACE groups was calculated by using regressions that adjusted for gender, race (white/nonwhite), age, original reason for entitlement in Medicare (elderly/disabled), dual eligibility, diagnoses during the previous 6 months, and county of residence. RESULTS: The PACE enrollees had fewer hospital admissions, preventable hospital admissions, hospital days, ER visits, and preventable ER visits than the WPP enrollees had. There was no difference in the length of hospital stays. CONCLUSIONS: PACE is more effective in controlling hospital and ER utilization than is the more flexible variant (WPP).

The effects of a variant of the program for all-inclusive care of the elderly on hospital utilization and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of the Wisconsin Partnership Program (WPP) on hospital, emergency department (ED), and nursing home utilization with those of traditional care. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental longitudinal cohort design. SETTING: Selected counties in Wisconsin. PARTICIPANTS: WPP elderly enrollees and two matched control groups consisting of frail older people enrolled in fee-for-service insurance plans, Medicare, and Medicaid and receiving home- and community-based waiver services, one from the same geographic area as the WPP and another from a location in the state where the WPP was not offered. MEASUREMENTS: Data came from administrative records. Regression and survival analyses were adjusted for case-mix variables. RESULTS: No significant differences in hospital utilization, ED visits, preventable hospitalizations, risk of entry into nursing homes, or mortality were found. WPP enrollees had more contact with care providers than did controls. CONCLUSION: WPP did not dramatically alter the pattern of care. Part of the weak effect may be attributable to the small numbers of WPP cases per participating physician.

The quality of care under a managed-care program for dual eligibles.

PURPOSE: Our objective in this study was to compare the quality of care provided under the Minnesota Senior Health Options (MSHO), a special program designed to serve dually eligible older persons, to care provided to controls who received fee-for-service Medicare and Medicaid managed care. DESIGN AND METHODS: Two control groups were used; one was drawn from nonenrollees living in the same area (Control-In) and another from comparable individuals living in another urban area where the program was not available (Control-Out). Cohorts living in the community and in nursing homes were included. Quality measures for both groups included mortality rates, preventable hospital admissions, and preventable emergency room (ER) visits. For the community group, nursing home admission rates were also tracked. For nursing home residents, quality measures included quality indicators derived from the Minimum Data Set. RESULTS: There were no differences in mortality rates for either cohort. MSHO had fewer short-stay nursing home admissions but no difference for stays 90 days or longer. MSHO community and nursing home residents had fewer preventable hospital and ER visits compared to Control-In. There were no major differences in nursing home quality indicator rates. IMPLICATIONS: The cost of changing the model of care for dual eligibles from a mixture of fee-for-service and managed care to a merged managed-care approach cannot be readily justified by the improvements in quality observed.

Patterns of utilization for the Minnesota senior health options program.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the use of medical services provided under the Minnesota Senior Health Options (MSHO) (a special program designed to serve dually eligible older persons) with that provided to controls who received fee-for-service Medicare and Medicaid managed care. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental design using two control groups; separate matched cohort and rolling cross-sectional analyses; regression models used to adjust for case-mix differences. SETTING: Urban Minnesota community and nursing home long-term care. PARTICIPANTS: Dually eligible elderly MSHO enrollees in the community and in nursing homes were compared with two sets of controls; one was drawn from nonenrollees living in the same area (control-in) and another from comparable persons living in another urban area where the program was not available (control-out). Cohorts living in the community and in nursing homes were included. MEASUREMENTS: Use of hospitals and emergency rooms, physician visits. RESULTS: In the community cohort, there were no significant differences in hospital admission rates or in hospital days. MSHO enrollees had significantly fewer preventable hospital admissions and significantly fewer preventable emergency services than the control-in group. MSHO nursing home enrollees had significantly fewer hospital admissions than either control group with or without adjustment at 12 and 18 months. MSHO enrollees had significantly fewer hospital days and preventable hospitalizations than the control-in group. MSHO enrollees had significantly fewer emergency room visits and preventable emergency room visits than either control group. CONCLUSION: In general, the results of this evaluation are mixed but favor MSHO. The effect of MSHO was stronger for nursing home enrollees than community enrollees. The lower rate of preventable hospitalizations and emergency room visits of MSHO enrollees suggests that MSHO affected the process of care by providing more of some types of preventive and community-care services for community residents.

Effect of an innovative medicare managed care program on the quality of care for nursing home residents.

PURPOSE: We sought to assess the quality of care provided by an innovative Medicare+Choice HMO targeted specifically at nursing home residents and employing nurse practitioners to provide additional primary care over and above that provided by physicians. The underlying premise of the Evercare approach is that the additional primary care will reduce the rate of untoward events and reduce the use of hospitals. Four aspects of quality were assessed: mortality, preventable hospitalizations, quality indicators derived from the Minimum Data Set, and change in functioning. DESIGN AND METHODS: The care provided by Evercare was compared with that for two control groups: (a) other residents in the same homes not enrolled in Evercare and (b) residents in homes in the same geographic area that did not participate in Evercare. Data came from various sources, including the Minimum Data Set. Utilization was based on Medicare data for controls and United Healthcare data for Evercare residents. Survival analysis was used to estimate mortality rates. Various risk adjustment methods were applied to the quality indicators. RESULTS: The hazard rates of mortality were significantly lower for Evercare residents than for other residents in the same nursing homes. Evercare residents had fewer preventable hospitalizations; the difference was significant for one control group. The rates of quality indicators and functional change were equivalent. IMPLICATIONS: Evercare, with its use of nurse practitioners, represents a model that can provide more efficient care that is of at least comparable quality.

The effect of Evercare on hospital use.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the use of hospital and related medical care services of a novel managed care program using nurse practitioners (NPs) and directed specifically at long-stay nursing home residents. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental posttest design with two control groups to minimize selection bias. SETTING: Nursing homes. PARTICIPANTS: Evercare enrollees in five sites were compared with two sets of controls: nursing home residents in the same nursing homes who did not enroll in Evercare (control-in) and residents of nursing homes that did not participate in Evercare (control-out). MEASUREMENTS: Utilization data from Medicare and United Healthcare (the parent corporation for Evercare) were obtained for slightly more than 2 years. Patterns of use were assessed by calculating the monthly use rate for each group and aggregating to form annual rates. Usages addressed included hospital admissions and days, emergency room visits, therapy services, mental health services, and podiatry. Adjustments were made to correct for age, race, and sex. Because the groups differed in terms of the rate of cognitive impairment, the analysis was stratified on this variable. RESULTS: The incidence of hospitalizations was twice as high in control residents as in Evercare residents (4.63 and 4.67 per 100 enrollees per month vs 2.43 in the 15 months after census, P<.001). This difference corresponded to Evercare's use of intensive service days. The same pattern held for preventable hospitalizations (0.80 and 0.86 vs 0.28, P<.001). The pattern held when residents were stratified by cognitive status. On average, using a NP is estimated to save about $103,000 a year in hospital costs per NP. CONCLUSION: The use of active primary care provided by NPs may have prevented the occurrence of some hospitalizable events, but its major effect was allowing cases to be managed more cost-effectively.

Nursing home residents covered by Medicare risk contracts: early findings from the EverCare evaluation project.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the characteristics of a sample of EverCare nursing home residents with two control groups: one composed of other residents in the same homes and another made up of residents in matched nursing homes. To compare levels of unmet need, satisfaction with medical care, and the use of advance directives. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental design using two control groups to minimize selection effects. Information collected by in-person surveys of nursing home residents and telephone surveys of proxies and family members. SETTING: Nursing homes affiliated with EverCare and matched control homes. PARTICIPANTS: Nursing home residents and their family members. MEASUREMENTS: Questionnaire addressing function (activities of daily living (ADLs)), unmet care needs, pain, use of advance directives, satisfaction, and caregiver burden. RESULTS: In general, the experimental and control groups were similar, but the EverCare sample had more dementia and less ADL disability. Family members in the EverCare sample expressed greater satisfaction with several aspects of the medical care they received than did controls. Satisfaction of residents in the EverCare sample was more comparable with that of controls. There was no difference in experience with advance directives between EverCare and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: EverCare appears to be a model of managed care worth tracking. It is producing care that is at least comparable with what is available in the fee-for-service environment, with evidence that families seem to appreciate the added attention. There is some suggestion that it has enrolled a less disabled but more demented population. Pending results on the effects of this care on hospitalization and emergency care should shed useful light.

Complications and short-term outcomes associated with total hip arthroplasty in teaching and community hospitals.

We followed 1,810 consecutive admissions for elective total hip arthroplasty (excluding hip fracture repair and revisions) to 27 Minnesota hospitals in a prospective study to assess the factors associated with better outcomes. Patients were interviewed before surgery and at 6 months, and their medical records were reviewed. The operative complication rate was 6.1%. In general, neither surgeon nor hospital volume had any significant association with the likelihood of operative complications. For the cementless prosthesis group, significantly more operative complications were associated with being in Health Maintenance Organizations or with insurance other than Medicare. General complications were associated positively with a higher caseload per surgeon for patients receiving cemented prostheses. Hospital volume had no significant relationship to the general complication rate. Hospital and surgical volume and most other provider characteristics were not associated with walking and pain outcomes; however, follow-up pain scores for patients with cementless prostheses were lower for board-certified orthopaedists even after adjusting for risk factors.