Trends in the Characteristics and Outcomes of Older Medicare Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury Treated in Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities: 2013 to 2018.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics and outcomes of older (65+) Medicare beneficiaries with traumatic brain injury (TBI) treated in inpatient rehabilitation facilities between 2013 and 2018. DESIGN: Descriptive study using IRF Patient Assessment Instrument (IRF-PAI) data reporting trends of the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and outcomes of inpatient rehabilitation facilities Medicare patients with TBI. SETTING: Inpatient rehabilitation facilities in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 99,804 older Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage patients with TBI (N=99,804). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of stay, self-care, and mobility functional outcomes, discharge destination. RESULTS: The number of older Medicare beneficiaries with TBI treated in inpatient rehabilitation facilities increased from 14,657 in 2013 to 18,791 in 2018, an increase of 28.2%. In addition to this overall increase in patients, we also found the percentage of men increased slightly (52.9% to 54.8%), there was a higher percentage of patients with tier 3 comorbidities, there was a decrease in the variability of length of stay, there was slightly more self-care and mobility improvement and a slightly higher percentage of patients discharged to the community (67.8% in 2013 and 71.6% in 2018). Newer standardized data showed that prior to the injury, more than one-third used a walker and more than three-quarters had a history of recent falls. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2013 and 2018, the number of Medicare beneficiaries with TBI treated in IRFs increased by approximately 28%. The characteristics of IRF older patients with TBI changed between 2013 and 2018 toward a slightly higher proportion of men, more comorbidities, and a higher percentage being discharged home after inpatient rehabilitation.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Medicare Patients Treated in Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities: 2013-2018.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of Medicare patients treated in inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) in 2013 through 2018. DESIGN: A descriptive study was conducted. METHODS: A total of 2,907,046 IRF Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage patient stays that ended in 2013 through 2018 were analyzed. RESULTS: The number of Medicare patients treated in IRFs increased by about 9%, from 466,092 in 2013 to 509,475 in 2018. Although IRF patients' age and racial/ethnic composition remained similar across the years, there was a shift in patients' primary rehabilitation diagnosis, with more patients with stroke, neurological conditions, traumatic and nontraumatic brain injury, fewer patients with orthopedic conditions, and fewer coded as having medically complex conditions. Across the years, the percentage of patients discharged to the community was between 73.0% and 74.4%. CLINICAL RELEVANCE TO THE PRACTICE OF REHABILITATION NURSING: Rehabilitation nurses should have training and expertise in the management of patients with stroke and neurological conditions to provide high-quality IRF care. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2013 and 2018, the number of Medicare patients treated in IRFs increased overall. There were more patients with stroke and neurological conditions and fewer patients with orthopedic conditions. Changes to IRF and other post-acute care policies, Medicaid expansion, and alternative payment programs may partially be driving these changes.

Reliability and Validity of the Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Discharge Mobility and Self-Care Quality Measures.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the reliability and validity of the publicly reported facility-level quality measures Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility (IRF) Discharge Mobility Score for Medical Rehabilitation Patients ("Discharge mobility score") and IRF Discharge Self-Care Score for Medical Rehabilitation Patients ("Discharge self-care score"). DESIGN: Observational study using standardized patient assessment data to examine facility-level split-half reliability and construct validity of quality measure scores. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: All IRFs (n = 1117) in the United States with at least 20 Medicare stays. Facility-level quality measure scores were calculated from 2017 data on 428,192 Medicare (fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage) IRF patient stays. METHODS: Using clinician-reported assessment data, we calculated facility-level mobility and self-care quality measure scores and examined reliability of these scores using split-half analysis and Pearson product-moment correlations, Spearman rank correlations, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,1). We examined construct validity of these scores by comparing facility-level quality measure scores by facility stroke disease-specific certification status. RESULTS: Reported as percentages meeting or exceeding expectations, IRF quality measure scores ranged from 8.3% to 90.1% for mobility and 9.0% to 90.3% for self-care. IRF scores, when split in half to examine reliability, showed strong, positive correlations for the mobility (Pearson = 0.898, Spearman = 0.898, ICC = 0.898) and self-care (Pearson = 0.886, Spearman = 0.874, ICC = 0.886) scores. When stratified by provider volume, ICCs remained strong. Construct validity analyses showed IRFs with stroke disease-specific certification had higher mean and median scores than IRFs without certification, and a greater proportion of IRFs that were certified had higher scores. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Our results support the reliability and construct validity of the IRF quality measures Discharge mobility and Discharge self-care scores. Reported as percentages meeting or exceeding expectations, these quality measures are designed to be more consumer-friendly compared to change scores.

Validation of the Standardized Function Data Elements among Medicare Skilled Nursing Facility Residents.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the distribution of admission and discharge functional abilities among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with a skilled nursing facility (SNF) stay. Further, to assess the validity of the standardized discharge self-care and mobility data by examining their association to community discharge. DESIGN: Observational study of SNF Medicare fee-for-service residents' self-care and mobility scores at admission and discharge. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries with Medicare Part A SNF stays in 2017 from 15,127 Medicare-certified SNFs. METHODS: We calculated self-care and mobility score frequencies and percentages at admission and discharge to describe the functional abilities of SNF residents; we examined discharge scores by percentage discharge to the community to evaluate item construct validity. RESULTS: Between admission and discharge, SNF resident scores showed overall improvements in function for all self-care and most mobility activities. For example, between admission and discharge the percentage of residents independent with toileting hygiene and sit to lying increased from 3.7% and 8.2%, to 25.3% and 32.7%, respectively. For all but 2 data elements, residents with lower functional abilities had a lower percentage of being discharged into the community, and the percentage of residents discharged into the community increased as residents performed functional activities of self-care and mobility at higher score ratings. There was a consistent monotonic relationship between residents' discharge self-care and mobility scores and community discharge rates for all but 2 data elements. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Our study found measurable improvements for each self-care and mobility function item for SNF Medicare Part A resident stays in 2017. The results also demonstrated a positive association between higher discharge self-care and mobility scores and higher discharge to community rates. These findings support the validity of the data elements in measuring functional abilities among SNF Medicare Part A residents.

Change in Mobility Quality Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities: Exclusion Criteria and the Risk Adjustment Model.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the exclusion criteria and updated risk adjustment model developed for the Change in Mobility quality measure in the inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) quality reporting program. Facility-level quality measures focused on patient outcomes usually require risk adjustment to account for varied admission characteristics of patients across facilities. DESIGN: This cohort study analyzed admission demographic and clinical factors associated with mobility change scores using the Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Patient Assessment Instrument (IRF-PAI) data for Medicare patients discharged from IRFs in calendar year 2017. SETTING: A total of 1129 IRFs in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 493,209 (N=493, 209) Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage IRF patient stays discharged in calendar year 2017. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mobility change scores using admission and discharge standardized assessment data from the IRF-PAI. RESULTS: Approximately 53% of patients in the study were female, 67% were aged 65-84 years, and nearly 80% were White. In the final risk adjustment model, 105 covariates were included, explaining 20% of variance in mobility change scores. Key risk adjusters included IRF primary diagnosis group, prior indoor ambulation functioning, age older than 90 years, and 14 of the comorbidities. The model showed good calibration across the range of deciles of predicted IRF mobility change scores; the ratio of the average expected to observed change scores ranged from 0.93-1.03, with all but 1 within ±0.03. CONCLUSIONS: The updated risk adjustment model uses IRF patients' demographic and clinical characteristics to predict their mobility change scores. The exclusion criteria and resulting risk model are used to calculate the risk adjusted Change in Mobility quality measure scores, enabling comparisons of Change in Mobility scores across IRFs.

Change in Self-Care Quality Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities: Exclusion Criteria and Risk-Adjustment Model.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the exclusion criteria and risk-adjustment model developed for the quality measure Change in Self-Care. The exclusion criteria and risk adjustment model are used to calculate Change in Self-Care scores, allowing scores to be compared across inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). DESIGN: This national cohort study examined admission demographic and clinical factors associated with IRF patients' self-care change scores using standardized self-care data for Medicare patients discharged in calendar year 2017. SETTING: A total of 1129 IRFs in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 493,209 (N=493,209) Medicare Fee-for-Service and Medicare Advantage IRF patient stays INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-care change scores using admission and discharge standardized assessment data elements from the Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility-Patient Assessment Instrument. RESULTS: Approximately 53% of patients were female, and 67% were between 65 and 84 years old. The final risk-adjustment model contained 93 clinically relevant risk adjusters and explained 23.1% of variance in self-care change scores. Risk adjusters that had the greatest effect on change scores and included IRF primary diagnosis group (ie, binary risk adjusters representing 13 diagnoses), prior self-care functioning, and age older than 90 years. When split by deciles of expected scores, the ratio of the average expected and observed change scores was within 2% of 1.0 across 8 groups and within 8% at the extremes, showing good predictive accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The risk adjustment model quantifies the relationship between IRF patients' demographic and clinical characteristics and their self-care score changes. The exclusion criteria and model are used to risk-adjust the IRF Change in Self-Care quality measure.

Standardized assessment of medication reconciliation in post-acute care.

BACKGROUND: Medication reconciliation (MR) facilitates safety during transitions of care, which occur frequently across post-acute care (PAC) settings. Under the intent of the IMPACT Act of 2014, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services contracted with the RAND Corporation to develop and test standardized assessment data elements (SADEs) that assess the MR process. METHODS: We employed an iterative process that incorporated stakeholder input and three rounds of testing to identify, refine, and evaluate MR SADEs. Testing took place in 186 PAC sites (57 home health agencies, 28 inpatient rehabilitation facilities, 28 long-term care hospitals, and 73 skilled nursing facilities). There were 2951 patients in the final test. Novel MR SADEs, based on the Joint Commission's framework, were refined. The final SADEs assessed whether: patient was taking high-risk medications; an indication was noted for each medication class; discrepancies were identified; patient or family/caregiver was involved in addressing discrepancies; discrepancies were communicated to physician (or designee) within 24 h; recommended physician actions regarding discrepancies were implemented within 24 h after physician response; and the reconciled list was communicated to patient, prescriber, and/or pharmacy. Two assessors per facility collected data for each patient. Analyses described completion time, data missingness, and interrater reliability, as well as feedback on assessor burden. RESULTS: Time to complete the MR SADEs was 3.2 min. Missing data were <5%. Interrater reliability was moderate to high (κ: 0.42 [whether a reconciled list was communicated to prescribers] to 0.89 [identifying patients taking hypoglycemics]). For identifying high-risk medication classes, interrater reliability was high (κ: 0.72-0.89). There were minimal differences by setting. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first set of MR SADEs that have been assessed across the PAC settings. Results demonstrate feasibility, based on missing data and completion time, and moderate to strong reliability, based on interrater comparisons, of assessing MR.

Who receives post-acute care? Characteristics of national population and field test sample.

BACKGROUND: Each year millions of Medicare beneficiaries in the United States receive post-acute care (PAC) in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), long-term care hospitals (LTCHs), and home health agencies (HHA). We describe, overall and by PAC setting, the national population of facilities and patients, evaluate the representativeness of a national field test sample, and describe patient characteristics in the national field test sample. METHODS: We analyzed the 2016 Provider of Service file, 2016 patient assessment data reported by PAC providers to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid, and data collected from PAC providers participating in a national field test. National data included 27,234 PAC settings and 5,033,820 beneficiaries receiving PAC. The national field test sample consisted of 143 facilities across 14 markets with 25-30 patients sampled from each facility (n = 3669). We describe PAC facility and patient characteristics for both the national and field test sample. RESULTS: Nationally, PAC facilities were more likely for-profit versus not for-profit, have an average nurse-to-bed ratio between 1:10 to 1:1 (lowest in SNFs) and be in metropolitan versus other areas. PAC patients were more likely to be white, female, and 75-89 years of age; heart failure as a primary medical condition tended to be more common than stroke or sepsis. There was limited variability across setting types. In the national field test, patients in LTCHs demonstrated a greater likelihood of cognitive impairment, positive depression screening, bowel and bladder appliance use, higher rates of medication drug classes taken, and use of therapeutic diets and IV medications. CONCLUSION: The national field test facility and patient samples were fairly representative of the national population overall and across settings with a few exceptions. Moreover, differences according to PAC setting on patient characteristics in the national field test aligned with general differences in patient populations.

Development and testing of a standardized pain interview assessment for use in post-acute care.

OBJECTIVES: Pain is highly prevalent among patients in post-acute care (PAC) settings and can affect quality of life, treatment outcomes, and transitions in care. Routine, accurate assessment of pain across settings is important for pain management and care planning; however, existing PAC assessment instruments do not assess patient pain in a standardized manner. METHODS: We developed and tested a set of pain interview data elements for use across PAC settings (skilled nursing facilities, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, long term care hospitals, home health agencies) as part of a larger effort undertaken by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to develop standardized assessment data elements to meet the requirements of the IMPACT Act of 2014. The interview assessed six pain constructs: presence; frequency; interference with sleep; interference with rehabilitation therapies [if applicable]; interference with daily activities; worst pain; and pain relief from treatments/medications). A total of 3031 PAC patients at 143 PAC settings (across 14 U.S. geographic/metropolitan areas in 10 states) participated in a national field test of standardized data elements from November 2017 to August 2018. We assessed item response distributions, time to complete interviews, inter-assessor agreement, and, for a subset of patients, change in responses between admission and discharge assessments. We also conducted focus groups with nurse assessors about their experiences administering the items. RESULTS: For patients reporting any pain, average time to complete the pain interview was 3.1 min (SD = 1.3), and interrater reliability was excellent for all data elements (kappa range: 0.95-0.99). Findings were similar across types of PAC settings. Qualitative data from nurses emphasized ease of administration and high perceived clinical utility. CONCLUSION: Findings provide support for feasibility of implementing a standardized pain interview assessment in PAC settings. This tool can support tracking of patient needs across settings and interoperability of data in electronic medical records.

Standardized assessment of cognitive function of post-acute care patients.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of cognitive function in post-acute care (PAC) settings is important for understanding an individual's condition and care needs, developing better person-directed care plans, predicting resource needs and understanding case mix. Therefore, we tested the feasibility and reliability of cognitive function assessments, including the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS), Confusion Assessment Method (CAM©), Expression and Understanding, and Behavioral Signs and Symptoms for patients in PAC under the intent of the IMPACT Act of 2014. METHODS: We conducted a national test of assessments of four standardized cognitive function data elements among patients in PAC. One hundred and forty-three PAC settings (57 home health agencies, 28 inpatient rehabilitation facilities, 28 long-term care hospitals, and 73 Skilled Nursing Facilities) across 14 U.S. markets from November 2017 to August 2018. At least one of four cognitive function data elements were assessed in 3026 patients. We assessed descriptive statistics, percent of missing data, time to complete, and interrater reliability between paired research nurse and facility staff assessors, and assessor feedback. RESULTS: The BIMS, CAM©, Expression and Understanding, and Behavioral Signs and Symptoms demonstrated low rates of missing data (less than 2%), high percent agreement, and substantial support from assessors. The prevalence of Behavioral Signs and Symptoms was low in our sample of PAC settings. CONCLUSION: Findings provide support for feasibility of implementing standardized assessment of all our cognitive function data elements for patients in PAC settings. The BIMS and CAM© were adopted into federal Quality Reporting Programs in the fiscal year/calendar year 2020 final rules. Future work could consider implementing additional cognitive items that assess areas not covered by the BIMS and CAM©.

Standardized assessment of cognitive function, mood, and pain among patients who are unable to communicate.

BACKGROUND: Assessments of patients have sought to increase the patient voice through direct patient interviews and performance-based testing. However, some patients in post-acute care (PAC) are unable to communicate and cannot participate in interviews or structured cognitive tests. Therefore, we tested the feasibility and reliability of observational assessments of cognitive function, mood, and pain for patients who are unable to communicate in PAC settings. METHODS: We conducted a national test of observational assessments of cognitive function, mood, and pain in 143 PAC facilities (57 home health agencies, 28 Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities, 28 Long-Term Care Hospitals, and 73 Skilled Nursing Facilities) across 14 U.S. markets from November 2017 to August 2018. For the 548 patients identified as unable to make themselves understood, we assessed descriptive statistics, percent of missing data, time to complete, and inter-rater reliability (IRR) between paired research nurse and facility staff assessors. RESULTS: Most sampled non-communicative patients were administered all three observational assessments. Among assessed patients, overall missing data was high for some items within the Staff Assessment for Mental Status (2.9% to 33.5%) and Staff Assessment of Patient Mood (12.4% to 44.3%), but not the Observational Assessment of Pain or Distress (0.0% to 4.4%). Average time to complete the data elements ranged from 2.4 to 3.5 min and IRR was good to excellent for all items (kappa range: 0.74-0.98). CONCLUSION: The three observational data elements had acceptable reliability. Although results revealed varying feasibility, there was support for feasibility overall in terms of implementing a standardized observational assessment of pain for patients in PAC settings. Additional work is needed for the Staff Assessment for Mental Status and the Staff Assessment of Patient Mood to improve the observable nature of these data elements and enhance instructions and training for standardizing the assessments.

Developing standardized patient assessment data elements for Medicare post-acute care assessments.

BACKGROUND: To support interoperability and care planning across provider types, the Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 (IMPACT Act) requires the submission of standardized patient assessment data using the assessment instruments provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). CMS was tasked with developing standardized assessment data elements (SADEs) within clinical categories named in the IMPACT Act. METHOD: We used environmental scans, subject matter expert, and stakeholder input to identify candidate SADEs; tested candidate data elements in alpha testing; revised SADEs and training protocols based on alpha analyses and stakeholder feedback; tested SADEs across post-acute care (PAC) settings in a national field test that included 3121 patients across 143 home health agencies, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, long-term care hospitals, and skilled nursing facilities in 14 markets across the United States; and analyzed data and stakeholder input from national testing. Field testing measured the time required for assessment, percent completion, and inter-rater reliability. We analyzed qualitative feedback from stakeholder focus groups and technical expert panels. We also obtained survey and focus group feedback from data collectors. RESULTS: We developed a mixed-method, multi-stakeholder procedure to identify and gather input on SADE for cross-setting use. This process yielded feasible and reliable SADEs for PAC settings that assess pain, cognitive status, mood, and medication reconciliation. The success of this work depended on working iteratively with diverse stakeholders and providing qualitative as well as quantitative evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The procedures applied in this project for developing and adopting SADEs for PAC, as well as the challenges and strategies to overcome challenges, should be considered in future item and quality measure development.

The IMPACT Act of 2014: Standardizing patient assessment data to support care coordination, quality outcomes, and interoperability.

The Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 (IMPACT Act) addressed the need for uniform, clinical, and demographic data in post-acute care (PAC) settings. Structured, uniform data enables potential interoperable data exchange, quality comparisons across PAC provider types, and the capacity to explore a Medicare unified PAC payment system. Standardized patient assessment data elements were developed for clinical domains such as cognitive function and mental status, special services, treatments, and interventions, and medical conditions and comorbidities to create a common language that can be used to bolster a patient's needs and goals to improve clinical outcomes. Clinical care, decision making, and care planning were at the center of all decisions made to standardize specific data elements. In addition, all standardized data were mapped to nationally accepted vocabulary standards to support electronic health information exchange. The standardized patient assessment data elements present the foundation for uniform language across the PAC continuum to promote a greater quality of care for every patient.

Standardized assessment of depression symptoms in post-acute care: A screening threshold approach.

BACKGROUND: Depression symptoms have impacts on quality of life, rehabilitation and treatment adherence, and resource utilization among patients in post-acute care (PAC) settings. The PHQ-2 and PHQ-9 are instruments for the assessment of depression, previously used in PAC settings, that have tradeoffs in terms of measurement depth versus respondent/assessor burden. Therefore, the present study tested a gateway version of the protocol (PHQ-2 to 9). METHODS: In 143 PAC settings in 14 U.S. markets across 10 states from November 2017 to August 2018, facility and research nurses administered the PHQ-2 to communicative patients (n = 3010). Nurses administered the full PHQ-9 if the patient screened positive for either of the two cardinal symptoms assessed by the PHQ-2 (depressed mood and anhedonia). We assessed the prevalence and frequency of depression symptoms using the PHQ-2 to 9, associations between depression screening results and patient characteristics and clinical conditions, and feasibility indicators. RESULTS: More than 1 in 4 patients (28%) screened positive on the PHQ-2. Only 6% of those completing the full PHQ-9 had a score indicating "minimal" severity. The average score (M = 11.9) met the threshold for moderate depression. Positive PHQ-2 screening was associated with age, female gender, disposition at discharge, septicemia/severe sepsis, and dependence for ADLs of toileting and lying to sitting mobility. Age was also associated with full PHQ-9 scores; patients ages 45-64 had the highest mean score. Length of stay was not associated with PHQ-2 screening results or full PHQ-2 to 9 scores. Missing data were minimal (<2.4%). The average time to complete was 2.3 min. Interrater reliability and percent agreement were excellent. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest the feasibility of a gateway scoring approach to standardized assessment of depression symptoms among PAC patients, and that depression symptoms are relatively common among this inpatient population.

Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Change in Self-Care and Change in Mobility Quality Measures: Development and Reliability and Validity Testing.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development, implementation and reliability and validity testing of the inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) Change in Self-Care and Change in Mobility quality measures. DESIGN: We describe the activities involved in developing and implementing the 2 facility-level quality measures, including public comment opportunities. We examined facility-level reliability using split-half testing and Pearson product-moment correlations, Spearman rank correlations, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,1). We examined validity by comparing facility-level quality measure scores and facility disease-specific certification status. SETTING: All 1117 IRFs in the United States with at least 20 Medicare stays that ended in 2017. PARTICIPANTS: Facility-level quality measure scores (N=1117) were derived from data from 427,517 (self-care) and 427,956 (mobility) Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage IRF patient stays in 2017. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Facility-level Change in Self-Care and Change in Mobility quality measure scores and facility Disease-Specific Certification for Stroke Rehabilitation from The Joint Commission were used in validity analysis. RESULTS: The split-half quality measure scores showed strong, positive correlations for the facility-level self-care (Pearson=0.903, Spearman=0.884, ICC=0.903, P<.0001) and mobility (Pearson=0.903, Spearman=0.884, ICC= 0.903, P<.0001) quality measure scores, providing evidence of reliability. ICCs remained strong when stratifying by provider volume. IRFs with stroke certification had slightly higher mean and median quality measure scores than IRFs without certification, and IRFs with the higher quality measure scores tended to have a higher percentage of certified IRFs. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses support the reliability and validity of the Change in Self-Care and Change in Mobility quality measure scores in IRFs.

A Postacute Care Function Process Quality Measure for the Collection of Standardized Self-Care and Mobility Data: Development, Implementation, and Quality Measure Scores.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of and quality measure scores for the cross-setting postacute care function process quality measure that requires the collection of standardized self-care and mobility data at admission and discharge and at least 1 function goal. DESIGN: Description of the development and implementation of the quality measure and the associated standardized self-care and mobility data elements. Descriptive analyses of quality measure scores for the first calendar year using data from the Minimum Data Set, the Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Patient Assessment Instrument, the Long-Term Care Hospitals (LTCH) Continuity Assessment Record and Evaluation Data Set, and Outcome and Assessment Information Set. SETTING: 15,127 skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), 1129 inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), 414 LTCHs, and 10,352 home health agencies (HHAs) in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: In total there were 9,216,943 stays/quality episodes (N = 9,216,943), including 2,084,774 SNF Medicare fee-for-service patient stays, 493,209 IRF Medicare patient stays, 161,714 patient stays, and 6,477,246 Medicare and Medicaid quality episodes. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores for the cross-setting postacute care function process quality measure. RESULTS: The mean process quality measure scores for SNFs, IRFs, LTCHs, and HHAs were 95.5%, 99.7%, 99.1%, and 95.8, respectively. The 10th percentile scores for SNFs, IRFs, LTCHs, and HHAs were 88.5%, 99.3%, 98.4%, and 89.4, respectively, indicating that at least 90% of postacute care providers submitted the standardized data for a large proportion of their patients. Mean quality measure scores did not vary by provider characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Most SNFs, IRFs, LTCHs, and HHAs submitted the self-care and mobility data, resulting in high quality measure scores during the first year of implementation. The availability of the standardized self-care and mobility data across postacute care settings offers the opportunity to compare the characteristics and functional outcomes of patients treated in postacute care.

Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Patients' Functional Abilities and Validity Testing of the Standardized Self-Care and Mobility Data Elements.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the abilities of Medicare patients in inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) at admission and discharge using the standardized self-care and mobility data elements and examine the validity of the data elements. These data are used in the Center for Medicare & Medicaid's IRF payment and quality reporting programs. DESIGN: Descriptive study reporting IRF patients' self-care and mobility scores. We also examined content validity and the associations between admission scores and length of stay (LOS), discharge scores and discharge destination, and change scores and the number of comorbidities. SETTING: Patients discharged from 1129 IRFs in 2017. PARTICIPANTS: IRF Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage patient stays (N = 493,209). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Self-care and mobility item scores, IRF LOS, discharge destination, and categories of the number of comorbidities. RESULTS: For each self-care and mobility activity, patients in IRFs overall made substantial improvements in function between admission and discharge. For example, the percentage of patients independent with eating and toilet transfers increased from 29.04% to 66.68% and 0.80% to 39.87%, respectively, between admission and discharge. Activities represented in the standardized data elements are included in other functional assessment instruments addressing content validity. Analyses showed a monotonic relationship between admission scores and LOS and between discharge scores and discharge to community percentages with only a few exceptions. Self-care and mobility scale change scores decreased as the number of comorbidities increased across categories. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in IRFs overall show functional improvement across each of the activities as defined by the standardized self-care and mobility data elements. The results showing the associations between patient functioning and 3 metrics (LOS, discharge to community rates, and number of comorbidities) support the validity of the data elements measuring functional abilities in the IRF Medicare population.

PROMIS Global Health: Feasibility in home health.

PURPOSE: This feasibility study assessed if the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) 10-item Global Health Survey (PROMIS-10) could be a reliable and valid patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for a population of cognitively intact home health (HH) patients. METHODS: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) along with their measurement contractor, Abt Associates, held a field test (2016-2017) to test the feasibility of the PROMIS-10 in in the Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS). Home Health clinician data collectors (registered nurses and physical therapists) were trained to complete the PROMIS-10 along with procedures to facilitate patient self-administration of PROMIS-10. These clinicians provided feedback about their experiences at a focus group at the end of data collection. RESULTS: 213 HH patients comprised the field test sample, 150 of whom completed PROMIS-10 surveys. Clinicians reported they found the PROMIS-10 relevant and acceptable for their HH patients, and noted the surveys provided insight into patients' views of their health. The PROMIS-10 measured the full range of patient-reported health and was sensitive to change between admission and discharge. CONCLUSIONS: The study confirmed that the PROMIS-10 can be implemented in the HH setting, opening the door for consideration for implementing the PROMIS-10 in post-acute care (PAC) settings. This study is a first step toward establishing an assessment that captures the patient's voice and could be reported by the CMS PAC quality reporting programs.

Examining Social Risk Factors in a Pressure Ulcer Quality Measure for Three Post-Acute Care Settings.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and explore relationships between social demographic factors and incidence or worsening of pressure ulcer scores among post-acute care (PAC) settings. DESIGN: The authors present the incidence of new or worsening pressure ulcers stratified by self-reported patient race and sex. Investigators used logistic regression modeling to examine relative risk of developing new or worsened pressure ulcers by sociodemographic status and multiple regression modeling to estimate the relative contribution of facility-level factors on rates of new or worsening pressure ulcers. SETTING: Three PAC settings: long-term care hospitals, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and skilled nursing facilities. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare Part A residents and patients with complete stays in PAC facilities during 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The incidence of new or worsened pressure ulcers as calculated using the specifications of the National Quality Forum-endorsed pressure ulcer quality measure #0678. MAIN RESULTS: The sample included 1,566,847 resident stays in 14,822 skilled nursing facilities, 478,292 patient stays in 1,132 inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and 121,834 patient stays in 397 long-term care hospitals. Significant differences in new or worsened pressure ulcer incidence rates by sociodemographic factors were found in all three settings. Black race, male sex, and advanced age were significant predictors of new or worsened ulcers, although controlling for health conditions reduced the racial disparity. The authors noted significant differences among facilities based on ownership type, urban/rural location, and sociodemographic makeup of facilities' residents/patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of disparities in the incidence of new or worsened pressure ulcers across PAC settings, suggesting publicly available quality data may be used to identify and ameliorate these problems.