Utilization and Cost Effects of the VHA Caring for Older Adults and Caregivers at Home (COACH) Program.

Since 2010, the Veterans Health Administration has initiated a home-based Caring for Older Adults and Caregivers at Home (COACH) program to provide clinical support to dementia patients and family caregivers. But its impact on health care utilization and costs is unknown. We compared 354 COACH care recipients with a propensity score weighted comparison group of 9,857 community-dwelling Veterans during fiscal years 2010-2015. In 1-year follow-up, COACH program was associated with a lower rate of long-term nursing home placement (average treatment effect on the treated [ATT] -3%; p = .01). The program increased utilization of emergency services (ATT 6%; p = .01), hospitals (ATT 10%; p < .001), and personal care services (ATT 31%; p < .001). Health care costs were also significantly increased. Improved access to services may have enabled COACH Veterans to stay at home longer. As one of Veterans Health Administration's top priorities to expand caregiver assistance programs, COACH seems to be a promising model for a nationwide implementation.

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.

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.

Geriatrics training and education for nongeriatrician faculty: the Dean's Faculty Scholars in Aging Program.

The University of South Carolina School of Medicine in Columbia implemented the Dean's Faculty Scholars in Aging (DFSA) Program in 2001 to strengthen the knowledge of geriatrics of nongeriatrician faculty members. The primary indicator of strengthening physicians' geriatrics knowledge was the development of new educational experiences by physicians in the DFSA Program. Twenty-six nongeriatrician faculty in seven departments were recruited to participate as scholars. Most scholars were in key educational positions, including assistant deans, department chairs, and clerkship and residency directors. Scholars received special training to develop geriatrics educational experiences based on their medical specialty and interests. Training encouraged cross-departmental collaboration. Scholars also had access to resources, including professional geriatric educators. Funds were available to support development of educational experiences and for a small amount of salary support. Since the program was implemented, 36 new geriatric experiences have been developed, 29 of the 36 were implemented, and 11 of the 36 were evaluated. Experiences included an elective for residents in the care of older patients in the emergency room and a required hospice rotation in the psychiatry clerkship for third-year medical students. All scholars developed a geriatrics educational experience, and most implemented one. This suggests that scholars demonstrated successful progress in geriatrics training.

Assessing geriatrics in undergraduate medical education: two different approaches.

Most medical schools do not have a separate course in geriatrics, but rather incorporate geriatrics into existing courses. Tracking and assessing curriculum content is more difficult in this setting. This paper describes and compares two approaches to assess curriculum content in geriatrics: a survey of course directors and a course objectives review. The results suggest that course directors report more geriatric content when asked as part of a regular survey than they identify as specific course objectives. Course objectives may be more reflective of the actual emphasis placed on aging-related material in courses. These two approaches appear to be complementary. Medical educators may find both self-report and course objective analysis to be useful and complementary in tracking geriatric material in the undergraduate medical curriculum.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment.

BACKGROUND: As an adjunct to the general and cancer-specific clinical and diagnostic examinations, comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is an integral tool that examines factors affecting the course of disease and the outcome of treatment. The principal areas of focus of the CGA include the patient's functional, physical, mental, emotional, pharmacotherapeutic, and socioeconomic status. METHODS: We describe the role of CGA in the identification and management of frail elderly patients. The literature is reviewed to outline the components, programmatic configurations, and process of CGA. Information from systematic reviews of clinical trials of different CGA program models is summarized, and observations relating to the research agenda concerning the applicability of CGA and CGA principles to management of older cancer patients are discussed. RESULTS: Since age itself is not predictive of outcome in an elderly cancer patient, the CGA helps to distinguish between elderly patients who should be treated with intent to cure and those who will benefit from clinical oncologic and geriatric co-management. CONCLUSIONS: A more accurate evaluation of prognostic indicators that includes CGA parameters could lead to a higher number of older patients being included in clinical cancer trials and being treated effectively in practice. It would also identify those who would benefit from gero-oncologic CGA and ongoing management aimed at maintaining function and community living.

The effectiveness and costs of comprehensive geriatric evaluation and management.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is a multidimensional interdisciplinary diagnostic process focused on determining a frail elderly person's medical, psychological, and functional capabilities in order to develop a coordinated and integrated plan for treatment and long-term follow-up. Geriatrics interventions building on CGA are defined from their historical emergence to the present day in a discussion of their complexity, goals and normative components. Through literature review, questions of the effectiveness and costs of these interventions are addressed. Evidence of effectiveness is derived from individual trials and, particularly, recent systematic reviews. While the trial evidence lends support to the proposition that geriatric interventions can be effective, the results have not been uniform. Review of meta-regression studies suggests that much of this outcome variability is related to identifiable program design parameters. In particular, targeting the frail, an interdisciplinary team structure with clinical control of care, and long-term follow-up, tend to be associated with effective programs. Answers to cost-effectiveness questions also vary and are more rare. With some exceptions, existing evidence as exists suggest that geriatrics interventions can be effective without raising total costs of care. Despite the attention given to these questions in recent years, there is still much room for clinical and scientific advance as we move to better understand what CGA interventions do well and in whom.

Coordination and advocacy for rural elders (CARE): a model of rural case management with veterans.

PURPOSE: To describe a pilot initiative sponsored by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to improve the health and community tenure of frail older veterans living in rural counties 50-100 miles from two host VHA medical centers. DESIGN AND METHODS: Veterans aged 75 and older who scored at risk of repeated hospital admission on the PRA-Plus telephone questionnaire were targeted and visited by evaluators who administered a comprehensive health questionnaire prior to being assessed at home by the Coordination and Advocacy for Rural Elders (CARE) program clinical teams. Guided by current state-of-the-art practices, the nurse-social worker teams performed in-home standardized assessments using the MDS-HC, developed patient-specific care plans, and mobilized family, community, and VHA resources to implement plans. RESULTS: On average, eight problems were identified for each patient, most commonly falls risk, social needs, pain, and needs related to IADL disability. As a result of initial assessment, two thirds of CARE participants received referral/linkage to formal services, more than half to medical providers. IMPLICATIONS: Through CARE, the VHA is learning more about the unmet needs of older rural veterans. Further development and evaluation should guide the VHA toward providing efficient, effective community-based services to all frail older veterans.