Developing an Adjunct Services Approach to Identify the Use of Procedures Not Covered by Health Insurance: The Case of In Vitro Fertilization.

BACKGROUND: Health care claims have an inherent limitation in that noncovered services are unreported. This limitation is particularly problematic when researchers wish to study the effects of changes in the insurance coverage of a service. In prior work, we studied the change in the use of in vitro fertilization (IVF) after an employer added coverage. To estimate IVF use before coverage began, we developed and tested an Adjunct Services Approach that identified patterns of covered services cooccurring with IVF. METHODS: Based on clinical expertise and guidelines, we developed a list of candidate adjunct services and used claims data after IVF coverage began to assess associations of those codes with known IVF cycles and whether any additional codes were also strongly associated with IVF. The algorithm was validated by primary chart review and was then used to infer IVF in the precoverage period. RESULTS: The selected algorithm included pelvic ultrasounds and either menotropin or ganirelix, yielding a sensitivity of 93.0% and specificity of >99.9%. DISCUSSION: The Adjunct Services Approach effectively assessed the change in IVF use postinsurance coverage. Our approach can be adapted to study IVF in other settings or to study other medical services experiencing coverage changes (eg, fertility preservation, bariatric surgery, and sex confirmation surgery). Overall, we find that an Adjunct Services Approach can be useful when (1) clinical pathways exist to define services delivered adjunct to the noncovered service, (2) those pathways are followed for most patients receiving the service, and (3) similar patterns of adjunct services occur infrequently with other procedures.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Postdischarge Outcomes for Dialysis Patients in the United States: Evidence from Medicare Claims Data.

Background: Recent investigations have shown that, on average, patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have a poorer postdischarge prognosis than those hospitalized without COVID-19, but this effect remains unclear among patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) who are on dialysis. Methods: Leveraging a national ESKD patient claims database administered by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, we conducted a retrospective cohort study that characterized the effects of in-hospital COVID-19 on all-cause unplanned readmission and death within 30 days of discharge for patients on dialysis. Included in this study were 436,745 live acute-care hospital discharges of 222,154 Medicare beneficiaries on dialysis from 7871 Medicare-certified dialysis facilities between January 1 and October 31, 2020. Adjusting for patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and prevalent comorbidities, we fit facility-stratified Cox cause-specific hazard models with two interval-specific (1-7 and 8-30 days after hospital discharge) effects of in-hospital COVID-19 and effects of prehospitalization COVID-19. Results: The hazard ratios due to in-hospital COVID-19 over the first 7 days after discharge were 95% CI, 1.53 to 1.65 for readmission and 95% CI, 1.38 to 1.70 for death, both with P<0.001. For the remaining 23 days, the hazard ratios were 95% CI, 0.89 to 0.96 and 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.07, with P<0.001 and P=0.50, respectively. Effects of prehospitalization COVID-19 were mostly nonsignificant. Conclusions: In-hospital COVID-19 had an adverse effect on both postdischarge readmission and death over the first week. With the surviving patients having COVID-19 substantially selected from those hospitalized, in-hospital COVID-19 was associated with lower rates of readmission and death starting from the second week.

Association of the Comprehensive ESRD Care Model with Treatment Adherence.

Background: Poor adherence to scheduled dialysis treatments is common and can cause adverse clinical and economic outcomes. In 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation launched the Comprehensive ESRD Care (CEC) Model, a novel modification of the Accountable Care Organization framework. Many model participants reported efforts to increase dialysis adherence and promptly reschedule missed treatments. Methods: With Medicare databases covering 2014-2019, we used difference-in-differences models to compare treatment adherence among patients aligned to 1037 CEC facilities relative to those aligned to matched comparison facilities, while accounting for their differences at baseline. Using dates of service, we identified patients who typically received three weekly treatments and the days when treatments typically occurred. Skipped treatments were defined as days when the patient was not hospitalized but did not receive an expected treatment, and rescheduled treatments as days when a patient who had skipped their previous treatment received an additional treatment before their next expected treatment date. Results: Patients in the CEC Model had higher odds of attending as-scheduled sessions relative to the comparison group, although the effect was only marginally significant (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.04, P=0.08). Effects were stronger among females (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.06, P=0.06) than males (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.04, P=0.49), and among those aged <70 years (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.05, P=0.04) than those aged ≥70 years (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.04, P=0.96). The CEC was associated with higher odds of rescheduled sessions (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.14, P<0.001). Effects were significant for both sexes, but were larger among males (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.18, P<0.001) than females (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.13, P=0.01), and effects were significant among those <70 years (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.17, P<0.001), but not those ≥70 years (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.07, P=0.80). Conclusions: The CEC Model is intended to incentivize strategies to prevent costly interventions. Because poor dialysis adherence may precipitate hospitalizations or other adverse events, many CEC Model participants encouraged adherence and promptly rescheduled missed treatments as strategic priorities. This study suggests these efforts were a success, although the absolute magnitudes of the effects were modest.

Medicare's Specialty-Oriented Accountable Care Organization: First-Year Results For People With End-Stage Renal Disease.

The Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Care (CEC) Model was the first Medicare specialty-oriented accountable care organization (ACO) model. We examined whether this model provided better results for beneficiaries with ESRD than primary care-based ACO models. We found significant decreases in Medicare payments ($126 per beneficiary per month), hospitalizations (5 percent), and likelihood of readmissions (8 percent) among beneficiaries with ESRD during the first year of alignment with the CEC Model and no impacts on these measures among beneficiaries with ESRD who were aligned with primary care-based ACOs, relative to fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries. Neither the CEC nor primary care-based ACO models significantly reduced the likelihood of catheter use, but fistula use increased for CEC Model beneficiaries to levels just above statistical significance. Other populations with chronic conditions may benefit from the testing of a specialty-oriented ACO model. In addition, primary care-based ACOs may benefit from applying CEC Model strategies to high-need subpopulations. Last, the strategies that enabled ESRD Seamless Care Organizations to achieve reductions in hospitalizations and readmissions even without hospital participation as owners could inform physician-led ACOs' efforts to coordinate with hospitals in their areas.

Excess healthcare spending associated with fractures among adults with cerebral palsy.

BACKGROUND: Fractures represent a triple threat to adults with cerebral palsy (CP): common, accumulate early in adulthood, and are consequential to health. An economic evaluation of fractures in CP is needed to highlight priorities for allocating resources to clinical and public health programs aimed at preventing fractures and their disease sequela. OBJECTIVE: To identify short-term healthcare costs associated with fractures among adults with CP. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database from 01/01/2011-12/31/2017. The primary cohort included adults ≥ 18 years old with CP with an incident fracture (CP+Fx), and cost estimates were compared with: CP without fractures (CPw/oFx) and without CP+Fx (w/oCP+Fx). A difference-in-difference (DiD) analysis compared the change in pharmacy and medical costs between cohorts from the one-year baseline period through the one-year post-index period in three-month quarters. RESULTS: CP+Fx (n = 855) had higher mean costs in the baseline and follow-up periods compared with CPw/oFx (n = 5667) and w/oCP+Fx (n = 588,042). The first post-index quarter DiD estimate suggests that CP+Fx accumulated an excess $6462 (95%CI = $3810-$9021) compared with w/oCP+Fx and $17,197 (95%CI = $14,418-$19,833) compared with CPw/oFx. The CP+Fx cohort had higher DiD estimates in the other follow-up quarters, but they were not statistically significant compared with CPw/oFx. When stratified by fracture site, vertebral column fractures for CP+Fx vs. w/oCP+Fx accumulated an excess $25,226 (95%CI = $12,639-$37,417). CONCLUSIONS: Fractures, especially of the vertebral column, were associated with high healthcare costs among adults with CP. Studies are needed to identify cost-effective opportunities to utilize available resources to prevent fractures and their costly sequela for CP.

Understanding the Tradeoffs Between Travel Burden and Quality of Care for In-center Hemodialysis Patients.

BACKGROUND: Renal dialysis is a lifesaving but demanding therapy, requiring 3 weekly treatments of multiple-hour durations. Though travel times and quality of care vary across facilities, the extent to which patients are willing and able to engage in weighing tradeoffs is not known. Since 2015, Medicare has summarized and reported quality data for dialysis facilities using a star rating system. We estimate choice models to assess the relative roles of travel distance and quality of care in explaining patient choice of facility. RESEARCH DESIGN: Using national data on 2 million patient-years from 7198 dialysis facilities and 4-star rating releases, we estimated travel distance to patients' closest facilities, incremental travel distance to the next closest facility with a higher star rating, and the difference in ratings between these 2 facilities. We fit mixed effects logistic regression models predicting whether patients dialyzed at their closest facilities. RESULTS: Median travel distance was 4 times that in rural (10.9 miles) versus urban areas (2.6 miles). Higher differences in rating [odds ratios (OR): 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.62] and greater area deprivation (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.48-0.53) were associated with lower odds of attending one's closest facility. Stratified models were also fit based on urbanicity. For rural patients, excess travel was associated with higher odds of attending the closer facility (per 10 miles; OR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.04-1.06). Star rating differences were associated with lower odds of receiving care from the closest facility among urban (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.51-0.63) and rural patients (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.08-0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Most dialysis patients have higher rated facilities located not much further than their closest facility, suggesting many patients could evaluate tradeoffs between distance and quality of care in where they receive dialysis. Our results show that such tradeoffs likely occur. Therefore, quality ratings such as the Dialysis Facility Compare (DFC) Star Rating may provide actionable information to patients and caregivers. However, we were not able to assess whether these associations reflect a causal effect of the Star Ratings on patient choice, as the Star Ratings served only as a marker of quality of care.

Assessing Eye Health and Eye Care Needs Among North American Native Individuals.

IMPORTANCE: There are few population-level studies on ophthalmic conditions and services among North American Native individuals. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether disparities in ophthalmic conditions and services exist between North American Native individuals and non-Hispanic White individuals in the US. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study used 100% Medicare fee-for-service (MFFS) enrollment data from the Vision and Eye Health Surveillance System (VEHSS) to examine ophthalmic conditions and service use in North American Native individuals and non-Hispanic White individuals in the US. In this study North American Native individuals included those who identified as American Indian, Native Alaskan, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander. Data were analyzed from August 2020 to April 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Claims and sociodemographic characteristics were extracted and means computed for categories of ophthalmic conditions and select ophthalmic services. Ophthalmic conditions and services were defined in the VEHSS using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes. Logistic regression was used to model differences between age-adjusted mean ophthalmic condition and service claim rates among North American Native individuals and non-Hispanic White individuals for each age cohort. Matching ophthalmic condition claim rates and ophthalmic service claim rates was performed to examine disparities by racial group. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Mean age-adjusted claim rates for ophthalmic conditions and services among North American Native individuals vs non-Hispanic White individuals per 100 persons. RESULTS: Claims were identified for 177 100 Native American Native individuals and 24 438 000 non-Hispanic White individuals. In 16 of 17 ophthalmic condition categories and 6 of 9 service categories, North American Native individuals had significantly different claim rates from non-Hispanic White individuals. There were higher ophthalmic condition claim rates but lower service claim rates for North American Native individuals (vs non-Hispanic White individuals) for refractive errors (ophthalmic condition, 17.2 vs 11.1; service, 48.3 vs 49.6, respectively; P < .001); blindness and low vision (ophthalmic condition, 1.48 vs 0.75: service, 19.2 vs 20.1, respectively; P < .001); injury, burns, and surgical complications (ophthalmic condition, 1.8 vs 1.7; service, 19.2 vs 20.1, respectively; P < .001); and orbital and external disease (ophthalmic condition, 15.7 vs 13.3; service, 48.3 vs 49.6, respectively; P < .001). For diabetic eye diseases, North American Native individuals had higher ophthalmic condition claim rates (5.22 vs 2.20) but no difference in service claim rates (14.4 vs 14.8; P = .26) compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cross-sectional study, North American Native individuals had higher prevalence of ophthalmic conditions but no corresponding increase in services (treatment for most ophthalmic conditions) compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. These results suggest worse eye health and higher unmet eyecare needs for North American Native individuals with MFFS coverage compared with non-Hispanic White individuals with MFFS coverage.

COVID-19 Risk Factors and Mortality Outcomes Among Medicare Patients Receiving Long-term Dialysis.

Importance: There is a need for studies to evaluate the risk factors for COVID-19 and mortality among the entire Medicare long-term dialysis population using Medicare claims data. Objective: To identify risk factors associated with COVID-19 and mortality in Medicare patients undergoing long-term dialysis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, claims-based cohort study compared mortality trends of patients receiving long-term dialysis in 2020 with previous years (2013-2019) and fit Cox regression models to identify risk factors for contracting COVID-19 and postdiagnosis mortality. The cohort included the national population of Medicare patients receiving long-term dialysis in 2020, derived from clinical and administrative databases. COVID-19 was identified through Medicare claims sources. Data were analyzed on May 17, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 2 main outcomes were COVID-19 and all-cause mortality. Associations of claims-based risk factors with COVID-19 and mortality were investigated prediagnosis and postdiagnosis. Results: Among a total of 498 169 Medicare patients undergoing dialysis (median [IQR] age, 66 [56-74] years; 215 935 [43.1%] women and 283 227 [56.9%] men), 60 090 (12.1%) had COVID-19, among whom 15 612 patients (26.0%) died. COVID-19 rates were significantly higher among Black (21 787 of 165 830 patients [13.1%]) and Hispanic (13 530 of 86 871 patients [15.6%]) patients compared with non-Black patients (38 303 of 332 339 [11.5%]), as well as patients with short (ie, 1-89 days; 7738 of 55 184 patients [14.0%]) and extended (ie, ≥90 days; 10 737 of 30 196 patients [35.6%]) nursing home stays in the prior year. Adjusting for all other risk factors, residing in a nursing home 1 to 89 days in the prior year was associated with a higher hazard for COVID-19 (hazard ratio [HR] vs 0 days, 1.60; 95% CI 1.56-1.65) and for postdiagnosis mortality (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.25-1.37), as was residing in a nursing home for an extended stay (COVID-19: HR, 4.48; 95% CI, 4.37-4.59; mortality: HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.16). Black race (HR vs non-Black: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.23-1.28) and Hispanic ethnicity (HR vs non-Hispanic: HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.64-1.72) were associated with significantly higher hazards of COVID-19. Although home dialysis was associated with lower COVID-19 rates (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75-0.80), it was associated with higher mortality (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.11-1.25). Conclusions and Relevance: These results shed light on COVID-19 risk factors and outcomes among Medicare patients receiving long-term chronic dialysis and could inform policy decisions to mitigate the significant extra burden of COVID-19 and death in this population.

The Impact of Choosing Wisely Interventions on Low-Value Medical Services: A Systematic Review.

Policy Points Dissemination of Choosing Wisely guidelines alone is unlikely to reduce the use of low-value health services. Interventions by health systems to implement Choosing Wisely guidelines can reduce the use of low-value services. Multicomponent interventions targeting clinicians are currently the most effective types of interventions. CONTEXT: Choosing Wisely aims to reduce the use of unnecessary, low-value medical services through development of recommendations related to service utilization. Despite the creation and dissemination of these recommendations, evidence shows low-value services are still prevalent. This paper synthesizes literature on interventions designed to reduce medical care identified as low value by Choosing Wisely and evaluates which intervention characteristics are most effective. METHODS: We searched peer-reviewed and gray literature from the inception of Choosing Wisely in 2012 through June 2019 to identify interventions in the United States motivated by or using Choosing Wisely recommendations. We also included studies measuring the impact of Choosing Wisely on its own, without interventions. We developed a coding guide and established coding agreement. We coded all included articles for types of services targeted, components of each intervention, results of the intervention, study type, and, where applicable, study quality. We measured the success rate of interventions, using chi-squared tests or Wald tests to compare across interventions. FINDINGS: We reviewed 131 articles. Eighty-eight percent of interventions focused on clinicians only; 48% included multiple components. Compared with dissemination of Choosing Wisely recommendations only, active interventions were more likely to generate intended results (65% vs 13%, p < 0.001) and, among those, interventions with multiple components were more successful than those with one component (77% vs 47%, p = 0.002). The type of services targeted did not matter for success. Clinician-based interventions were more effective than consumer-based, though there is a dearth of studies on consumer-based interventions. Only 17% of studies included a control arm. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions built on the Choosing Wisely recommendations can be effective at changing practice patterns to reduce the use of low-value care. Interventions are more effective when targeting clinicians and using more than one component. There is a need for high-quality studies that include active controls.

Cost-sharing With Medicaid Expansion in Michigan: Obligations and Propensity to Pay.

BACKGROUND: Six states expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act have obtained waivers to incorporate cost-sharing. OBJECTIVE: We describe the magnitude and distribution of cost-sharing imposed by the Healthy Michigan Plan and enrollees' propensity to pay. RESEARCH DESIGN: Enrollees are followed for at least 18 months (6-mo baseline period for utilization and spending before receipt of first cost-sharing statement; ≥12 mo follow-up thereafter to ascertain obligations and payments). Analyses stratified by income, comparing enrollees with income less than Federal Poverty Level (FPL) who faced only utilization-based copayments and those greater than or equal to FPL who also faced premium contributions. SUBJECTS: A total of 158,322 enrollees aged 22-62 who initially enrolled during the first year of the program and remained continuously enrolled ≥18 months. RESULTS: Among those enrolled ≥18 months, 51.0% faced cost-sharing. Average quarterly invoices were $4.85 ($11.11 for those with positive invoices) for income less than FPL and $26.71 ($30.93 for those with positive invoices) for incomes greater than or equal to FPL. About half of enrollees with obligations made at least partial payments, with payments being more likely among those >100% FPL. Payment of the full obligation was highest in the initial 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Many payment obligations go uncollected, suggesting that in a system without the threat of disenrollment, the impacts of cost-sharing may be muted. Similarly, the ability of cost-sharing to defray the program's budgetary impact may also be less than anticipated.

The Determinants and Variation of Nursing Home Private-Pay Prices: Organizational and Market Structure.

Nursing home (NH) care is arguably the most significant financial risk faced by the elderly without long-term care insurance or Medicaid coverage. Annual out-of-pocket expenditures for NH care can easily exceed $70,000. However, our understanding of private-pay prices is limited by data availability. Utilizing a unique data set on NH prices from 2005 through 2010 across eight states, we find that NH price growth has consistently outpaced growth in consumer and medical care prices. After adjusting for geographical and facility differences, for-profit chains charge the lowest prices, independently operated for-profit and nonprofit NHs have similar prices, and nonprofit chains charge the highest prices. Adjusted prices are also likely to be higher when NHs have higher occupancy rates and markets are more concentrated. The significant differences in price across organizational and market structures suggest private-pay prices can be an important factor when evaluating and comparing the value of NH care.

Characteristics of Markets and Patients Served by ESRD Seamless Care Organizations.

Under the Comprehensive End-stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Care (CEC) Model, dialysis facilities and nephrologists form ESRD Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs) to deliver high value care. This study compared the characteristics of patients and markets served and unserved by CEC and assessed its generalizability. ESCOs operated in 65 of 384 markets. ESCO markets were larger than non-ESCO markets, had fewer White patients, higher household income, and higher Medicare spending per patient. Patients in ESCOs were similar to eligible nonaligned patients in age and sex but differed in race/ethnicity and were more often treated in an urban area; comorbidity prevalence differed modestly. CEC is available to a meaningful share of the dialysis population and relatively few dialysis patients resided in a market where no provider could meet the participation threshold, so market size may not be the primary barrier for potential new participants in CEC or future kidney care models.

Trends in Regional Supply of Peritoneal Dialysis in an Era of Health Reform, 2006 to 2013.

Peritoneal dialysis (PD), a home-based treatment for kidney failure, is associated with similar mortality, higher quality of life, and lower costs compared with hemodialysis. Yet <10% of patients receive PD. Access to this alternative treatment, vis-à-vis providers' supply of PD services, may be an important factor but has been sparsely studied in the current era of national payment reform for dialysis care. We describe temporal and regional variation in PD supply among Medicare-certified dialysis facilities from 2006 to 2013. The average proportion of facilities offering PD per hospital referral region increased from 40% (2006) to 43% (2013). PD supply was highest in hospital referral regions with higher percentage of facilities in urban areas (p = .004), prevalence of PD use (p < .0001), percentage of White end-stage renal disease patients (p = .02), and per capita income (p = .02). Disparities in PD access persist in rural, non-White, and low-income regions. Policy efforts to further increase regional PD supply should focus on these underserved communities.

Evaluating national trends in outcomes after implementation of a star rating system: Results from dialysis facility compare.

OBJECTIVE: To examine which factors are driving improvement in the Dialysis Facility Compare (DFC) star ratings and to test whether nonclinical facility characteristics are associated with observed longitudinal changes in the star ratings. DATA SOURCES: Data were collected from eligible patients in over 6,000 Medicare-certified dialysis facilities from three annual star rating and individual measure updates, publicly released on DFC in October 2015, October 2016, and April 2018. STUDY DESIGN: Changes in the star rating and individual quality measures were investigated across three public data releases. Year-to-year changes in the star ratings were linked to facility characteristics, adjusting for baseline differences in quality measure performance. DATA COLLECTION: Data from publicly reported quality measures, including standardized mortality, hospitalization, and transfusion ratios, dialysis adequacy, type of vascular access for dialysis, and management of mineral and bone disease, were extracted from annual DFC data releases. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The proportion of four- and five-star facilities increased from 30.0% to 53.4% between October 2015 and April 2018. Quality improvement was driven by the domain of care containing the dialysis adequacy and hypercalcemia measures. Additionally, independently owned facilities and facilities belonging to smaller dialysis organizations had significantly lower odds of year-to-year improvement than facilities belonging to either of the two large dialysis organizations (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.736, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.631-0.856 and OR: 0.797, 95% CI: 0.723-0.879, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of four- and five-star facilities has increased markedly over a three-year time period. These changes were driven by improvement in the specific quality measures that may be most directly under the control of the dialysis facility.

Comparing Mortality of Peritoneal and Hemodialysis Patients in an Era of Medicare Payment Reform.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have shown peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients to have lower or equivalent mortality to patients who receive in-center hemodialysis (HD). Medicare's 2011 bundled dialysis prospective payment system encouraged expansion of home-based PD with unclear impacts on patient outcomes. This paper revisits the comparative risk of mortality between HD and PD among patients with incident end-stage kidney disease initiating dialysis in 2006-2013. RESEARCH DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing 2-year all-cause mortality among patients with incident end-stage kidney disease initiating dialysis via HD and PD in 2006-2013, using data from the US Renal Data System and Medicare. Analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazards models fit with inverse probability of treatment weighting that adjusted for measured patient demographic and clinical characteristics and dialysis market characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 449,652 patients starting dialysis between 2006 and 2013, the rate of PD use in the first 90 days increased from 9.3% of incident patients in 2006 to 14.2% in 2013. Crude 2-year mortality was 27.6% for patients dialyzing via HD and 16.7% for patients on PD. In adjusted models, there was no evidence of mortality differences between PD and HD before and after bundled payment (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-1.04; P=0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Overall mortality for HD and PD use was similar and mortality differences between modalities did not change before versus after the 2011 Medicare dialysis bundled payment, suggesting that increased use of home-based PD did not adversely impact patient outcomes.

Accountable Care Organizations and Spending for Patients Undergoing Long-Term Dialysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite representing 1% of the population, beneficiaries on long-term dialysis account for over 7% of Medicare's fee-for-service spending. Because of their focus on care coordination, Accountable Care Organizations may be an effective model to reduce spending inefficiencies for this population. We analyzed Medicare data to examine time trends in long-term dialysis beneficiary alignment to Accountable Care Organizations and differences in spending for those who were Accountable Care Organization aligned versus nonaligned. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In this retrospective cohort study, beneficiaries on long-term dialysis between 2009 and 2016 were identified using a 20% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries. Trends in alignment to an Accountable Care Organization were compared with alignment of the general Medicare population from 2012 to 2016. Using an interrupted time series approach, we examined the association between Accountable Care Organization alignment and the primary outcome of total spending for long-term dialysis beneficiaries from prior to Accountable Care Organization implementation (2009-2011) through implementation of the Comprehensive ESRD Care model in October 2015. We fit linear regression models with generalized estimating equations to adjust for patient characteristics. RESULTS: During the study period, 135,152 beneficiaries on long-term dialysis were identified. The percentage of long-term dialysis beneficiaries aligned to an Accountable Care Organization increased from 6% to 23% from 2012 to 2016. In the time series analysis, spending on Accountable Care Organization-aligned beneficiaries was $143 (95% confidence interval, $5 to $282) less per beneficiary-quarter than spending for nonaligned beneficiaries. In analyses stratified by whether beneficiaries received care from a primary care physician, savings by Accountable Care Organization-aligned beneficiaries were limited to those with care by a primary care physician ($235; 95% confidence interval, $73 to $397). CONCLUSIONS: There was a substantial increase in the percentage of long-term dialysis beneficiaries aligned to an Accountable Care Organization from 2012 to 2016. Moreover, in adjusted models, Accountable Care Organization alignment was associated with modest cost savings among long-term dialysis beneficiaries with care by a primary care physician.

Assessment of Prescription Analgesic Use in Older Adults With and Without Chronic Kidney Disease and Outcomes.

Importance: Pain is a common symptom among patients with kidney disease. However, little is known about use of analgesics among patients aged 65 years or older with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who do not receive dialysis treatment. Objective: To assess national trends and geographic variations in use of opioids and prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in older adults with and without CKD in the US (2006-2015) and examine associations between use of opioids and patient outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used the 5% Medicare claims data (2005-2015) to select 10 retrospective annual cohorts of Medicare Part D beneficiaries aged 65 years and older from 2006 to 2015 and a retrospective longitudinal cohort. Data were analyzed in August 2019. Exposures: CKD status and other comorbidities identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Analgesic use was measured by overall use (proportion of ever used opioids/NSAIDs), long-term use (prescribed >90 days), and cumulative use (total annual days' supply). Patient outcomes included progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 6 260 454 beneficiaries (9.6% identified with CKD by claims) were selected in the annual cohorts and 649 339 beneficiaries (8.3% identified with CKD) were selected in the longitudinal cohort. There was significant growth in opioid use (31.2%-42.4%) and NSAID use (10.7%-16.6%) among patients aged 65 years and older with CKD from 2006 to 2015. Long-term use of opioids increased during 2006 to 2014 (25.8%-36.7%) but decreased through 2015 at 35.6%, while long-term use of NSAIDs remained stable. Opioid use was higher in patients with CKD, particularly CKD stages 4 to 5 (odds ratio [OR], 1.35; 95% CI, 1.33-1.37; P < .001) compared with non-CKD. NSAID use was lower in patients with CKD stages 4 to 5 (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.54-0.56; P < .001). Substantial geographic variations in analgesic use were observed across states (opioid use in CKD: 24.7%-54.3%; NSAID use in CKD: 11.2%-20.8%, 2012-2015). Opioid use was associated with progression to ESKD (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16; P = .001) and death (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.18-1.20; P < .001) independent of CKD status and other covariates. There was an inverse association between NSAID use and death (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.83-0.85; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Medicare patients with CKD, use of prescription analgesics, both opioid and NSAID, increased from 2006 to 2015. Optimizing pain management in a complex condition such as kidney disease should remain a priority for clinicians and researchers alike.