Nurse Practitioner Care, Scope of Practice, and End-of-Life Outcomes for Nursing Home Residents With Dementia.

Importance: Nursing home residents with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) often receive burdensome care at the end of life. Nurse practitioners (NPs) provide an increasing share of primary care in nursing homes, but how NP care is associated with end-of-life outcomes for this population is unknown. Objectives: To examine the association of NP care with end-of-life outcomes for nursing home residents with ADRD and assess whether these associations differ according to state-level NP scope of practice regulations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study using fee-for-service Medicare claims included 334 618 US nursing home residents with ADRD who died between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from April 6, 2015, to December 31, 2018. Exposures: Share of nursing home primary care visits by NPs, classified as minimal (<10% of visits), moderate (10%-50% of visits), and extensive (>50% of visits). State NP scope of practice regulations were classified as full vs restrictive in 2 domains: practice authority (authorization to practice and prescribe independently) and do-not-resuscitate (DNR) authority (authorization to sign DNR orders). Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitalization within the last 30 days of life and death with hospice. Linear probability models with hospital referral region fixed effects controlling for resident characteristics, visit volume, and geographic factors were used to estimate whether the associations between NP care and outcomes varied across states with different scope of practice regulations. Results: Among 334 618 nursing home decedents (mean [SD] age at death, 86.6 [8.2] years; 69.3% female), 40.5% received minimal NP care, 21.4% received moderate NP care, and 38.0% received extensive NP care. Adjusted hospitalization rates were lower for residents with extensive NP care (31.6% [95% CI, 31.4%-31.9%]) vs minimal NP care (32.3% [95% CI, 32.1%-32.6%]), whereas adjusted hospice rates were higher for residents with extensive (55.6% [95% CI, 55.3%-55.9%]) vs minimal (53.6% [95% CI, 53.3%-53.8%]) NP care. However, there was significant variation by state scope of practice. For example, in full practice authority states, adjusted hospice rates were 2.88 percentage points higher (95% CI, 1.99-3.77; P < .001) for residents with extensive vs minimal NP care, but the difference between these same groups was 1.77 percentage points (95% CI, 1.32-2.23; P < .001) in restricted practice states. Hospitalization rates were 1.76 percentage points lower (95% CI, -2.52 to -1.00; P < .001) for decedents with extensive vs minimal NP care in full practice authority states, but the difference between these same groups in restricted practice states was only 0.43 percentage points (95% CI, -0.84 to -0.01; P < .04). Similar patterns were observed in analyses focused on DNR authority. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that NPs appear to be important care providers during the end-of-life period for many nursing home residents with ADRD and that regulations governing NP scope of practice may have implications for end-of-life hospitalizations and hospice use in this population.

Administrator Perspectives on the Impact of COVID-19 on the Administration of the Patient Driven Payment Model in U.S. Skilled Nursing Facilities.

The Patient Driven Payment Model (PDPM) was implemented in U.S. skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) in October 2019, shortly before COVID-19. This new payment model aimed to reimburse SNFs for patients' nursing needs rather than the previous model which reimbursed based on the volume of therapy received. Through 156 semi-structured interviews with 40 SNF administrators from July 2020 to December 2021, this qualitative study clarifies the impact of COVID-19 on the administration of PDPM at SNFs. Interview data were analyzed using modified grounded theory and thematic analysis. Our findings show that SNF administrators shifted focus from management of the PDPM to COVID-19-related delivery of care adaptations, staff shortfalls, and decreased admissions. As the pandemic abated, administrators re-focused their attention to PDPM. Policy makers should consider the continued impacts of the pandemic at SNFs, particularly on delivery of care, admissions, and staffing, on the ability of SNF administrators to administer a new payment model.

Implementing the Patient Driven Payment Model-Perspectives from Skilled Nursing Facility Administrators.

Objective: To explore skilled nursing facility (SNF) administrator retrospective perspectives on their preparation for and initial implementation of the Patient Driven Payment Model (PDPM), the new Medicare payment system for SNFs enacted on October 1, 2019. Methods: 156 interviews at 40 SNFs in eight U.S. markets were conducted and qualitatively analyzed. Results: Administrators retrospectively expressed feeling well-prepared for the PDPM implementation. Advance preparation focused on training staff regarding patient assessment and documentation. Administrators also recognized increased incentives for admitting patients with more complex needs and prepared accordingly. Therapy staffing reductions were concentrated in contract employees, while SNF-employed therapists were less affected. Conclusion: Policy makers and industry experts should consider the long-term impact of changing financial incentives through payment reform, and ensure that reimbursement best reflects the cost of providing services while prioritizing high-quality care. PDPM's effect on care quality and access to care should continue to be monitored.

Advanced practice clinician care and end-of-life outcomes for community- and nursing home-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries with dementia.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) often face burdensome end-of-life care transfers. Advanced practice clinicians (APCs)-which include nurse practitioners and physician assistants-increasingly provide primary care to this population. To fill current gaps in the literature, we measured the association between APC involvement in end-of-life care versus hospice utilization and hospitalization for older adults with ADRD. METHODS: Using Medicare data, we identified nursing home- (N=517,490) and community-dwelling (N=322,461) beneficiaries with ADRD who died between 2016 and 2018. We employed propensity score-weighted regression methods to examine the association between different levels of APC care during their final 9 months of life versus hospice utilization and hospitalization during their final month. RESULTS: For both nursing home- and community-dwelling beneficiaries, higher APC care involvement associated with lower hospitalization rates and higher hospice rates. DISCUSSION: APCs are an important group of providers delivering end-of-life primary care to individuals with ADRD. HIGHLIGHTS: For both nursing home- and community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries with ADRD, adjusted hospitalization rates were lower and hospice rates were higher for individuals with higher proportions of APC care involvement during their final 9 months of life. Associations between APC care involvement and both adjusted hospitalization rates and adjusted hospice rates persisted when accounting for primary care visit volume.

How Medicare Advantage plans use data for supplemental benefits decision-making.

OBJECTIVES: Health care payers are increasingly experimenting with interventions to address social risk factors. With enactment of the 2018 Bipartisan Budget Act, Medicare Advantage (MA) plans have new opportunities to offer supplemental benefits that are not "primarily health-related." This article presents findings from interviews conducted with executives from MA plans regarding plan decision-making processes related to new social risk factor benefits. STUDY DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative interviews with MA plan leadership. METHODS: A total of 63 plan representatives from 29 unique MA plans were interviewed about the rationale for social risk-related interventions and how data are used to inform benefits expansion decisions. This paper combines qualitative interview data from 2 separate studies with similar target groups and interview guides. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed to examine underlying themes. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged: (1) Plans use multiple data sources to determine how to target benefits; (2) evidence gaps hinder decision-making to expand or offer new supplemental benefits; and (3) in the absence of sufficient evidence, some plans have their own research and quality improvement processes to maximize effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide insights about opportunities and challenges that MA plans face in making decisions related to supplemental benefits designed to address members' social risk factors. Barriers include collecting, generating, and analyzing data critical to informing investments. Results highlight the need to ensure interoperability of new and existing data sources, foster shared learning opportunities, and narrow evidence gaps about specific social care interventions to inform the design and implementation of effective supplemental benefits.

Health Care and Community-Based Organization Partnerships to Address Social Needs: Medicare Advantage Plan Representatives' Perspectives.

Payers and providers are increasingly being held accountable for the overall health of their populations and may choose to partner with community-based organizations (CBOs) to address members' social needs. This study examines the opportunities and challenges that health care entities, using Medicare Advantage (MA) plans as an example, encounter when forming these relationships. We conducted interviews with 38 representatives of 17 MA organizations, representing 65% of MA members nationally. Transcripts were qualitatively analyzed to understand overarching themes. Participants described qualities they look for in community partners, including an alignment of organizational missions and evidence of improved outcomes. Participants also described challenges in working with CBOs, including needing an evidence base for CBOs' services and an absence of organizational infrastructure. Results demonstrate areas where CBOs may target their efforts to appeal to payers and providers and reveal a need for health care entities to assist CBOs in acquiring skills necessary for partnerships.

Quality Management Strategies in Medicaid Managed Care: Perspectives From Medicaid, Plans, and Providers.

Medicaid managed care allows Medicaid beneficiaries to receive services through contractual relationships between managed care organizations and state Medicaid offices. Medicaid offices monitor quality of care, and many states encourage or require plans to adopt quality management practices. This research examines quality management in Medicaid managed care from the perspectives of Medicaid officials, managed care plan representatives, and providers through 25 qualitative interviews in one Northeastern state. Plan representatives described quality management efforts as robust and discussed strategies targeting providers and beneficiaries. Medicaid officials indicated motivations for plans to be responsible for quality management. Providers were unaware of plan efforts or reported them to be counterproductive since performance data were thought to be inaccurate or limited, and modest incentive programs presented excessive administrative burden. Providers' general skepticism about managed care plans' quality improvement efforts may hinder their effectiveness, cause frustration, and lead to administrative burden that may harm care quality.

Strategy and risk sharing in hospital-postacute care integration.

ISSUE/TREND: Postacute care has been identified as a primary area for cost containment. The continued shift of payment structures from volume to value has often put hospitals at the forefront of addressing postacute care cost containment. However, hospitals continue to struggle with models to manage patients in postacute care institutions, such as skilled nursing facilities or in home health agencies. Recent research has identified postacute care network development as one mechanism to improve outcomes for patients sent to postacute care providers. Many hospitals, though, have not utilized this strategy for fear of not adhering to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services requirements that patients are given choice when discharged to postacute care. MANAGERIAL APPROACH: A hospital's approach to postacute care integration will be dictated by environmental uncertainty and the level of embeddedness hospitals have with potential postacute care partners. Hospitals, though, must also consider how and when to extend shared savings to postacute care partners, which will be based on the complexity of the risk-sharing calculation, the ability to maintain network flexibility, and the potential benefits of preserving competition and innovation among the network members. For hospital leaders, postacute care network development should include a robust and transparent data management process, start with an embedded network that maintains network design flexibility, and include a care management approach that includes patient-level coordination. CONCLUSION: The design of care management models could benefit from elevating the role of postacute care providers in the current array of risk-based payment models, and these providers should consider developing deeper relationships with select postacute care providers to achieve cost containment.

Medicare Advantage plan representatives' perspectives on Pay for Success.

OBJECTIVES: To understand how Medicare Advantage (MA) plan representatives perceive the alternative financing model Pay for Success (PFS) and its potential to address members' social risk factors. STUDY DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative interviews designed to understand plan representatives' priorities regarding addressing nonmedical needs of their members, awareness of and experiences with PFS, and thoughts about implementing PFS as a method to address members' nonmedical needs. METHODS: Interviews with 38 upper-management representatives from 17 MA plans, which represent 65% of MA beneficiaries nationally, were conducted from July to November 2018. Plans varied in geographic coverage, star rating, and enrollment. Transcripts were qualitatively analyzed to understand overarching themes and patterns of responses. RESULTS: MA plan representatives were largely unfamiliar with PFS and were interested in learning more about how it could address members' social needs. When probed about specific requirements of PFS, responses varied: Some reported willingness to share data with project partners and be reviewed by independent evaluators; others expressed their preference to keep data and performance analysis internal to the organization. Although most representatives prioritized innovation, some were more risk averse and preferred to use traditional methods to deliver new services. CONCLUSIONS: MA plan representatives were unfamiliar with PFS, but most expressed interest in it as an alternative model for funding initiatives to address members' social needs. Education of MA representatives about PFS as an alternative payment model for innovative programming is warranted. However, further guidance from CMS is needed to assuage the concerns raised by these representatives.

Perspectives of Medicare Advantage Plan Representatives on Addressing Social Determinants of Health in Response to the CHRONIC Care Act.

Importance: The passage of the Creating High-Quality Results and Outcomes Necessary to Improve Chronic (CHRONIC) Care Act in 2018 allows Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, which enroll more than one-third of Medicare beneficiaries, greater flexibility to address members' social determinants of health (SDOH) through supplemental benefits. Objective: To understand MA plan representatives' perspectives on the importance of addressing members' SDOH and their responses to the passage of the CHRONIC Care Act. Design, Setting, and Participants: This semistructured qualitative interview study conducted via telephone from July 6, 2018, to November 7, 2018, included participants from 17 MA plans that collectively enrolled more than 13 million MA members (>65% of the total MA market). Data analysis was conducted from September 18, 2018, to December 13, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using a modified content analysis approach to identify major themes and subthemes. Results: Thirty-eight participants representing 17 MA plans varying in region, star rating, and size were interviewed. Analysis of interviews revealed 3 key themes. The first theme was that participants increasingly recognize the value of addressing members' SDOH. The second theme was that participants had different perspectives on whether MA plans should directly address SDOH and how to do so. While some reported that they were taking advantage of the increased flexibility provided by the CHRONIC Care Act to design new benefits or partner with community-based organizations, others indicated that it was outside of their purview to directly address members' SDOH. The third theme was that participants described complex decision-making around how to provide supplemental benefits, including a need for evidence, return on investment, strong community partnerships, and guidance from the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the changes in MA plans' benefit packages in response to the CHRONIC Care Act and their efforts to address SDOH will vary. Therefore, it is likely that MA enrollees will be differentially affected by the implementation of the CHRONIC Care Act.

Medicare Advantage control of postacute costs: perspectives from stakeholders.

OBJECTIVES: Medicare Advantage (MA) plans have strong incentives to control costs, including postacute spending; however, to our knowledge, no research has examined the methods that MA plans use to control or reduce postacute costs. This study aimed to understand such MA plan efforts and the possible unintended consequences. STUDY DESIGN: A multiple case study method was used. METHODS: We conducted 154 interviews with administrative and clinical staff working in 10 MA plans, 16 hospitals, and 25 skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) in 8 geographically diverse markets across the United States. RESULTS: Participants discussed how MA plans attempted to reduce postacute care spending by controlling the SNF to which patients are discharged and SNF length of stay (LOS). Plans typically influenced SNF selection by providing patients with a list of facilities in which their care would be covered. To influence LOS, MA plans most commonly authorized patient stays in SNFs for a certain number of days and required that SNFs adhere to this limitation, but they did not provide guidance or assistance in ensuring that the LOS goals were met. Hospital and SNF responses to the largely authorization-based system were frequently negative, and participants expressed concerns about potential unintended consequences. CONCLUSIONS: In their interactions with hospitals and SNFs, MA plans attempted to influence the choice of SNF and LOS to control postacute spending. However, exerting too much influence over hospitals and SNFs, as these results seem to indicate, may have the negative consequences of delayed hospital discharge and SNFs' avoidance of burdensome plans.

Qualitative perspectives of primary care providers who treat Medicaid managed care patients.

BACKGROUND: Declining job satisfaction and concurrent reductions in Medicaid participation among primary care providers have been documented, but there is limited qualitative work detailing their first-hand experiences treating Medicaid patients. The objective of this study is to describe the experiences of some primary care providers who treat Medicaid patients using in-depth qualitative analysis. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with 15 primary care providers treating Medicaid patients in a Northeastern state. Participant recruitment efforts focused on including different types of primary care providers practicing in diverse settings. Qualitative interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview protocol. We developed a coding scheme to analyze interview transcripts and identify themes. RESULTS: Providers expressed challenges effectively meeting their patients' needs under current policy. They described low Medicaid reimbursement and underinvestment in care coordination programs to adequately address the social determinants of health. Providers shared other concerns including poor access to behavioral health services, discontinuous Medicaid coverage due to enrollment and renewal policies, and limited reimbursement for alternative pain treatment. Providers offered their own suggestions for the allocation of financial investments, Medicaid policy, and primary care practice. CONCLUSIONS: Underinvestment in primary care in Medicaid may detract from providers' professional satisfaction and hinder care coordination for Medicaid patients with complex healthcare needs. Policy solutions that improve the experience of primary care providers serving Medicaid patients are urgently needed to ensure sustainability of the workforce and improve care delivery.

Hospital-Skilled Nursing Facility Collaboration: A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding the Effect of Linkage Strategies.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the nature and degree of hospitals' efforts to collaborate with skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and associated patient outcomes. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Qualitative data were collected through 138 interviews with staff in 16 hospitals and 25 SNFs in eight markets across the United States in 2015. Quantitative data include Medicare claims data for the 290,603 patients discharged from those 16 hospitals between 2008 and 2015. STUDY DESIGN/DATA COLLECTION: Semi-structured interviews with hospital and SNF staff were coded and used to classify hospitals' collaboration efforts with SNFs into high versus low collaboration hospitals, and risk-adjusted, claims-based hospital readmission rates from SNF were compared. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Hospital collaboration efforts were defined as establishing SNF partners, transition management initiatives, and hospital staff visits to SNFs. High collaboration hospitals were more likely to send patients to SNFs (as opposed to home, home with home health, or other PAC settings), sent a higher share of patients to high quality SNFs, and had fewer hospital readmissions from SNF sooner than did low collaboration hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Although collaboration with SNF requires significant administrative and clinical time investment, it is associated with positive patient outcomes.

Challenges and Consequences of Reduced Skilled Nursing Facility Lengths of Stay.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the challenges that reductions in length of stay (LOS) pose for skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and their postacute care (PAC) patients. DATA SOURCES/SETTING: Seventy interviews with staff in 25 SNFs in eight U.S. cities, LOS data for patients in those SNFs. STUDY DESIGN: Data were qualitatively analyzed, and key themes were identified. Interview data from SNFs with and without reductions in median risk-adjusted LOS were compared and contrasted. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We conducted 70 semistructured interviews. LOS data were derived from minimum dataset (MDS) admission records available for all patients in all U.S. SNFs from 2012 to 2014. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Challenges reported regardless of reductions in LOS included frequent and more complicated re-authorization processes, patients becoming responsible for costs, and discharging patients whom staff felt were unsafe at home. Challenges related to reduced LOS included SNFs being pressured to discharge patients within certain time limits. Some SNFs reported instituting programs and processes for following up with patients after discharge. These programs helped alleviate concerns about patients, but they resulted in nonreimbursable costs for facilities. CONCLUSIONS: The push for shorter LOS has resulted in unexpected challenges and costs for SNFs and possible unintended consequences for PAC patients.

The Impact of Medicaid Managed Care Plan Type on Continuous Medicaid Enrollment: A Natural Experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of assignment to a Medicaid-focused versus mixed managed care plan on continuity of Medicaid coverage. DATA SOURCES: 2011-2016 Medicaid claims from a Northeastern state. STUDY DESIGN: Following the exit of a Medicaid managed care insurer, Medicaid administrators prioritized provider networks in reassigning enrollees, but randomly assigned beneficiaries whose providers were equally represented in the two plans. We leveraged the natural experiment created by random plan assignment and conducted an instrumental variable analysis. DATA COLLECTION: We analyzed Medicaid claims for 12,083 beneficiaries who were members of the exiting Blue Cross Blue Shield plan prior to January 1, 2011. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Managed care plan type did not significantly impact continuous enrollment in the Medicaid program. Greater outpatient utilization and the presence of a special need among children were associated with longer enrollment in Medicaid. CONCLUSIONS: Managed care plans did not differ in their capacity to keep Medicaid beneficiaries continuously enrolled in coverage, despite differences in plan features.

Patients Are Not Given Quality-Of-Care Data About Skilled Nursing Facilities When Discharged From Hospitals.

Hospitals are now being held at least partly accountable for Medicare patients' care after discharge, as a result of regulations and incentives imposed by the Affordable Care Act. However, little is known about how patients select a postacute care facility. We used a multiple case study approach to explore both how patients requiring postacute care decide which skilled nursing facility to select and the role of hospital staff members in this decision. We interviewed 138 staff members of sixteen hospitals and twenty-five skilled nursing facilities and 98 patients in fourteen of the skilled nursing facilities. Most patients described receiving only lists of skilled nursing facilities from hospital staff members, while staff members reported not sharing data about facilities' quality with patients because they believed that patient choice regulations precluded them from doing so. Consequently, patients' choices were rarely based on readily available quality data. Proposed changes to the Medicare conditions of participation for hospitals that pertain to discharge planning could rectify this problem. In addition, less strict interpretations of choice requirements would give hospitals flexibility in the discharge planning process and allow them to refer patients to higher-quality facilities.