Validation of the JEN frailty index in the National Long-Term Care Survey community population: identifying functionally impaired older adults from claims data.

BACKGROUND: Use of a claims-based index to identify persons with physical function impairment and at risk for long-term institutionalization would facilitate population health and comparative effectiveness research. The JEN Frailty Index [JFI] is comprised of diagnosis domains representing impairments and multimorbid clusters with high long-term institutionalization [LTI] risk. We test the index's discrimination of activities-of-daily-living [ADL] dependency and 1-year LTI and mortality in a nationally representative sample of over 12,000 Medicare beneficiaries, and compare long-term community survival stratified by ADL and JFI. METHODS: 2004 U.S. National Long-Term Care Survey data were linked to Medicare, Minimum Data Set, Veterans Health Administration files and vital statistics. ADL dependencies, JFI score, age and sex were measured at baseline survey. ADL and JFI groups were cross-tabulated generating likelihood ratios and classification statistics. Logistic regression compared discrimination (areas under receiver operating characteristic curves), multivariable calibration and accuracy of the JFI and, separately, ADLs, in predicting 1-year outcomes. Hall-Wellner bands facilitated contrasts of JFI- and ADL-stratified 5-year community survival. RESULTS: Likelihood ratios rose evenly across JFI risk categories. Areas under the curves of functional dependency at ≥3 and ≥ 2 for JFI, age and sex models were 0.807 [95% c.i.: 0.795, 0.819] and 0.812 [0.801, 0.822], respectively. The area under the LTI curve for JFI and age (0.781 [0.747, 0.815]) discriminated less well than the ADL-based model (0.829 [0.799, 0.860]). Community survival separated by JFI strata was comparable to ADL strata. CONCLUSIONS: The JEN Frailty Index with demographic covariates is a valid claims-based measure of concurrent activities-of-daily-living impairments and future long-term institutionalization risk in older populations lacking functional information.

Hospital readmission among older adults who return home with unmet need for ADL disability.

PURPOSE: This study determined whether returning to the community from a recent hospitalization with unmet activities of daily living (ADL) need was associated with probability of readmission. METHODS: A total of 584 respondents to the 1994, 1999, and/or 2004 National Long-Term Care Surveys (NLTCS) who were hospitalized within 90 days prior to the interview and reported ADL disability at the time of the interview were considered for analysis. Medicare claims linked to the NLTCS provided information about hospital episodes, so those enrolled in Health Maintenance Organizations or Veterans Affairs Medical Centers were not included (n = 62), resulting in a total sample size of 522. ADL disability was defined as needing human help or equipment to complete the task. Unmet ADL need was defined as receiving inadequate or no help for one or more ADL disabilities. Disability that began within 90 days of the interview was considered new disability. RESULTS: After adjusting for demographic, health, and functioning characteristics, unmet ADL need was associated with increased risk for hospital readmission (HR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.03-1.82). Risk of readmission was greater for those with unmet need for new disabilities than those with unmet need for disabilities that were present before the index hospitalization (HR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.01-2.73). IMPLICATIONS: Many older patients are discharged from the hospital with ADL disability. Those who report unmet need for new ADL disabilities after they return home from the hospital are particularly vulnerable to readmission. Patients' functional needs after discharge should be carefully evaluated and addressed.

Does Medicaid pay more to a program of all-inclusive care for the elderly (PACE) than for fee-for-service long-term care?

BACKGROUND: In rebalancing from nursing homes (NHs), states are increasing access of NH-certified dually eligible (Medicare/Medicaid) patients to community waiver programs and Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE). Prior evaluations suggest Medicaid's PACE capitation exceeds its spending for comparable admissions in alternative care, although the latter may be underestimated. We test whether Medicaid payments to PACE are lower than predicted fee-for-service outlays in a long-term care admission cohort. METHODS: Using grade-of-membership methods, we model health deficits for dual eligibles aged 55 or more entering waiver, PACE, and NH in South Carolina (n = 3,988). Clinical types, membership vectors, and program type prevalences are estimated. We calculate a blend, fitting PACE between fee-for-service cohorts, whose postadmission 1-year utilization was converted to attrition-adjusted outlays. PACE's capitation is compared with blend-based expenditure predictions. RESULTS: Four clinical types describe population health deficits/service needs. The waiver cohort is most represented in the least impaired type (1: 47.1%), NH entrants in the most disabled (4: 38.5%). Most prevalent in PACE was a dementia type, 3 (32.7%). PACE's blend was waiver: 0.5602 (95% CI: 0.5472, 0.5732) and NH: 0.4398 (0.4268, 0.4528). Average Medicaid attrition-adjusted 1-year payments for waiver and NH were $4,177 and $77,945. The mean predicted cost for PACE patients in alternative long-term care was $36,620 ($35,662 and $37,580). PACE's Medicaid capitation was $27,648-28% below the lower limit of predicted fee-for-service payments. CONCLUSIONS: PACE's capitation was well under outlays for equivalent patients in alternative care-a substantial savings for Medicaid. Our methods provide a rate-setting element for PACE and other managed long-term care.

Estimation and validation of a multiattribute model of Alzheimer disease progression.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate and validate a multiattribute model of the clinical course of Alzheimer disease (AD) from mild AD to death in a high-quality prospective cohort study, and to estimate the impact of hypothetical modifications to AD progression rates on costs associated with Medicare and Medicaid services. DATA AND METHODS: The authors estimated sex-specific longitudinal Grade of Membership (GoM) models for AD patients (103 men, 149 women) in the initial cohort of the Predictors Study (1989-2001) based on 80 individual measures obtained every 6 mo for 10 y. These models were replicated for AD patients (106 men, 148 women) in the 2nd Predictors Study cohort (1997-2007). Model validation required that the disease-specific transition parameters be identical for both Predictors Study cohorts. Medicare costs were estimated from the National Long Term Care Survey. RESULTS: Sex-specific models were validated using the 2nd Predictors Study cohort with the GoM transition parameters constrained to the values estimated for the 1st Predictors Study cohort; 57 to 61 of the 80 individual measures contributed significantly to the GoM models. Simulated, cost-free interventions in the rate of progression of AD indicated that large potential cost offsets could occur for patients at the earliest stages of AD. CONCLUSIONS: AD progression is characterized by a small number of parameters governing changes in large numbers of correlated indicators of AD severity. The analysis confirmed that the progression of AD represents a complex multidimensional physiological process that is similar across different study cohorts. The estimates suggested that there could be large cost offsets to Medicare and Medicaid from the slowing of AD progression among patients with mild AD. The methodology appears generally applicable in AD modeling.