A Nationwide Study of Inpatient Admissions, Mortality, and Costs for Patients with Cirrhosis from 2005 to 2015 in the USA.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Liver cirrhosis is a substantial health burden in the USA, but population-based data regarding the trend and medical expenditure are limited and outdated. We investigated the trends of inpatient admissions, costs, and inpatient mortality from 2005 to 2015 among cirrhotic patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the National Inpatient Sample database. We adjusted the costs to 2015 US dollars using a 3% inflation rate. National estimates of admissions were determined using discharge weights. RESULTS: We identified 1,627,348 admissions in cirrhotic patients between 2005 and 2015. From 2005 to 2015, the number of weighted admissions in cirrhotic patients almost doubled (from 505,032 to 961,650) and the total annual hospitalization cost in this population increased three times (from 5.8 to 16.3 billion US dollars). Notably, admission rates varied by liver disease etiology, decreasing from 2005 to 2015 among patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related cirrhosis while increasing (almost tripled) among patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)-related cirrhosis. The annual inpatient mortality rate per 1000 admissions overall decreased from 63.8 to 58.2 between 2005 and 2015 except for NAFLD (27.2 to 35.8) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Rates and costs of admissions in cirrhotic patients have increased substantially between 2005 and 2015 in the USA, but varied by liver disease etiology, with decreasing rate for HCV-associated cirrhosis and for HBV-associated cirrhosis but increasing for NAFLD-associated cirrhosis. Inpatient mortality also increased by one-third for NAFLD, while it decreased for other diseases. Cost also varied by etiology and lower for HCV-associated cirrhosis.

Rising Inpatient Encounters and Economic Burden for Patients with Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the fastest-growing chronic liver disease. However, little is known about NAFLD inpatient resource utilization and clinical outcomes. AIMS: The aim of this study was to quantify inpatient NAFLD encounters using patient-level data over time. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of de-identified data for NAFLD patients from the California Patient Discharge Database from 2006 to 2013. NAFLD patients were identified by ICD9 codes 571.40, 571.41, 571.49, 571.8, and 571.9. RESULTS: NAFLD patients (n = 91,558) were predominantly female (60%), 45-65 years old (44%), and white (53%). Inpatient encounters increased from 8153 in 2006 to 16,457 in 2013 and were associated with a 207% increase in charges ($686 million in 2006 to $1.42 billion in 2013) and average increase in charges of 9.8% per year adjusting for inflation. Comorbidities (obesity, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, cardiovascular disease, other cancer, and renal disease) increased significantly over time (all P < 0.05). From 2006 to 2011, there were 11,463 deaths (1849 for liver-related hospitalizations) (mean follow-up 4.00 ± 2.13 years). The most significant predictors of death were age > 75 (aHR 3.9, P < 0.0001), male gender (aHR 1.10, P < 0.0001), white race (aHR 1.2, P < 0.0001), decompensated cirrhosis (aHR 2.1, P < 0.0001), and cancer other than HCC (aHR 3.2, P < 0.0001). Within the liver-related hospitalization cohort, mortality predictors were similar, except for Hispanic race (aHR 0.92, P < 0.0096) and renal disease (aHR 1.50, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The number of NAFLD inpatient encounters increased significantly from 2006 to 2013, as did the inflation-adjusted inpatient charges. The most significant predictors of death were non-liver cancers (HR 3.11, P < 0.0001, CI 3.06-3.16) and age > 75 years (HR 3.94, P < 0.0001, HR 3.86-4.03).

Correction: Economic and clinical burden of viral hepatitis in California: A population-based study with longitudinal analysis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196452.].

Higher mortality and hospital charges in patients with cirrhosis and acute respiratory illness: a population-based study.

Both cirrhosis and acute respiratory illness (ARI) carry substantial disease and financial burden. To compare hospitalized patients with cirrhosis with ARI to cirrhotic patients without ARI, a retrospective cohort study was conducted using the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database. To balance the groups, propensity score matching (PSM) was used. We identified a total of 46,192 cirrhotic patients during the three study periods (14,049, 15,699, and 16,444 patients, respectively). Among patients hospitalized with cirrhosis, the ARI prevalence was higher in older age groups (p < 0.001), the Asian population (p = 0.002), non-Hispanic population (p = 0.001), and among Medicare patients (p < 0.001). Compared to controls, patients with ARI had 53.8% higher adjusted hospital charge ($122,555 vs. $79,685 per patient per admission, p < 0.001) and 35.0% higher adjusted in-hospital mortality (p < 0.001). Older patients, patients with alcoholic liver disease or liver cancer were at particularly higher risk (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.94 (95% CI: 2.26-3.83), 1.22 (95% CI: 1.02-1.45), and 2.17 (95% CI: 1.76-2.68) respectively, p = 0.028 to <0.001). Mortality rates and hospital charges in hospitalized cirrhotic patients with ARI were higher than in cirrhotic controls without ARI. Preventive efforts such as influenza and pneumococcal vaccination, especially in older patients and those with liver cancer, or alcoholic liver disease, would be of value.

Economic and clinical burden of viral hepatitis in California: A population-based study with longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: Economic burden of HBV and HCV infection are trending upwards. AIMS: Compare hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) related hospital admission rates, charges, mortality rates, causes of death in a US population-based study. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of HBV and HCV patients from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (2006-2013) database. RESULTS: A total of 23,891 HBV and 148,229 HCV patients were identified. Across the 8-year period, the mean increase for all-cause ($1,863 vs $1,388) and liver-related hospitalization charges ($1,175 vs $675) were significantly higher for the HBV cohort compared to the HCV cohort. HBV patients had significantly higher liver-related hospital charges per person per year than HCV patients after controlling for covariates ($123,239 vs $111,837; p = 0.002). Compared to HCV patients, adjusted mortality hazard ratio was slightly lower in HBV patients (relative risk = 0.96; 95% CI 0.94-0.99). The major causes and places of death were different. The three major causes of death for HBV were: other malignant neoplasms (35%), cardiovascular disease/other circulatory disorders (17%), and liver-related disease (15%) whereas for HCV patients were: liver-related disease (22%), other malignant neoplasms (20%), and cardiovascular disease (16%). Regarding the place of death, 53% of HBV patients and 44% of HCV patients died in hospital inpatient, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HBV patients incurred higher liver-related hospital charges and higher mean increase for all-cause and liver-related hospitalization charges over the 8-year period compared to HCV patients. HBV patients had slightly lower mortality rate and their major causes and places of death were noticeably different from HCV patients.

How five leading safety-net hospitals are preparing for the challenges and opportunities of health care reform.

Safety-net hospitals will continue to play a critical role in the US health care system, as they will need to care for the more than twenty-three million people who are estimated to remain uninsured after the Affordable Care Act is implemented. Yet such hospitals will probably have less federal and state support for uncompensated care. At the same time, safety-net hospitals will need to reposition themselves in the marketplace to compete effectively for newly insured people who will have a choice of providers. We examine how five leading safety-net hospitals have begun preparing for reform. Building upon strong organizational attributes such as health information technology and system integration, the study hospitals' preparations include improving the efficiency and quality of care delivery, retaining current and attracting new patients, and expanding the medical home model.

Supreme Court review of the Affordable Care Act: the future of health care reform and practice of gastroenterology.

After decades of failed attempts to enact comprehensive health care reform, President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law on March 23, 2010. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been regarded as the most significant piece of domestic policy legislation since the establishment of Medicare in 1965. The ACA would cover an estimated 32 of the 50 million uninsured Americans by expanding Medicaid, providing subsidies to lower income individuals, establishing health insurance exchanges, and restricting insurance companies from excluding patients from coverage. The ACA also includes many payment and health care delivery system reforms intended to improve quality of care and control health care spending. Soon after passage of the ACA, numerous states and interest groups filed suits challenging its legality. Supreme Court consideration was requested in five cases and the Supreme Court selected one case, brought by 26 states, for review. Oral arguments were heard this spring, March 26-28. The decision will have far reaching consequences for health care in America and the practice of gastroenterology for decades to come. This article reviews the four major issues before the Supreme Court and implications for health care reform and future practice of gastroenterology. Payment reforms, increased accountability, significant pressures for cost control, and new care delivery models will significantly change the future practice of gastroenterology. With these challenges however is a historic opportunity to improve access to care and help realize a more equitable, sustainable, and innovative health care system.

Toward a 21st-century health care system: recommendations for health care reform.

The coverage, cost, and quality problems of the U.S. health care system are evident. Sustainable health care reform must go beyond financing expanded access to care to substantially changing the organization and delivery of care. The FRESH-Thinking Project (www.fresh-thinking.org) held a series of workshops during which physicians, health policy experts, health insurance executives, business leaders, hospital administrators, economists, and others who represent diverse perspectives came together. This group agreed that the following 8 recommendations are fundamental to successful reform: 1. Replace the current fee-for-service payment system with a payment system that encourages and rewards innovation in the efficient delivery of quality care. The new payment system should invest in the development of outcome measures to guide payment. 2. Establish a securely funded, independent agency to sponsor and evaluate research on the comparative effectiveness of drugs, devices, and other medical interventions. 3. Simplify and rationalize federal and state laws and regulations to facilitate organizational innovation, support care coordination, and streamline financial and administrative functions. 4. Develop a health information technology infrastructure with national standards of interoperability to promote data exchange. 5. Create a national health database with the participation of all payers, delivery systems, and others who own health care data. Agree on methods to make de-identified information from this database on clinical interventions, patient outcomes, and costs available to researchers. 6. Identify revenue sources, including a cap on the tax exclusion of employer-based health insurance, to subsidize health care coverage with the goal of insuring all Americans. 7. Create state or regional insurance exchanges to pool risk, so that Americans without access to employer-based or other group insurance could obtain a standard benefits package through these exchanges. Employers should also be allowed to participate in these exchanges for their employees' coverage. 8. Create a health coverage board with broad stakeholder representation to determine and periodically update the affordable standard benefit package available through state or regional insurance exchanges.