Effect of statewide reduction in extended care facility use after joint replacement on hospital readmission.

BACKGROUND: Extended care facility use is a primary driver of variation in hospitalization-associated health care payments and is increasingly a focus for savings under episode-based payment. However, concerns remain that extended care facility limits could incur rising readmissions, emergency department use, or other costs. We analyzed the effects of a statewide value improvement initiative to decrease extended care facility use after lower extremity arthroplasty on extended care facility use, readmission, emergency department use, and payments. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using complete claims from the Michigan Value Collaborative for patients undergoing lower extremity joint replacement. We compared the change in extended care facility use before (2012-2013) and after (2016-2017) the aforementioned statewide initiative with 90-day postacute care, readmission, and emergency department rates and payments using t tests. RESULTS: Of the patients included, 68,537 underwent total knee arthroplasty; 27,131 underwent total hip arthroplasty. Statewide, extended care facility use and postacute care payments decreased (extended care facility: 27.5% before vs 18.1% after, payments: $4,999 vs $3,832, P < .0001) without increased readmission rates (8.0% vs 7.6%, P = .10) or payments ($1,087 vs $1,026, P = .14). Emergency department use increased (7.8% vs 8.9%, P < .0001). Per hospital, there was no association between extended care facility use change and readmission rate change (r = 0.05). Hospital change in extended care facility use ranged from +2.3% (no extended care facility decrease group) to -16.6% (large extended care facility decrease group) and was associated with lower total episode payments without differences in change in readmission rate/payments or emergency department use. CONCLUSION: Despite decreased use of extended care facilities, there was no compensatory increase in readmission rate or payments. Reducing excess use of extended care facilities after joint replacement may be an important opportunity for savings in episode-based reimbursement.

The Cost of Implementing and Sustaining the COMprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services Model.

BACKGROUND: The COMprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services (COMPASS) model, a transitional care intervention for stroke patients discharged home, was tested against status quo postacute stroke care in a cluster-randomized trial in 40 hospitals in North Carolina. This study examined the hospital-level costs associated with implementing and sustaining COMPASS. METHODS: Using an activity-based costing survey, we estimated hospital-level resource costs spent on COMPASS-related activities during approximately 1 year. We identified hospitals that were actively engaged in COMPASS during the year before the survey and collected resource cost estimates from 22 hospitals. We used median wage data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and COMPASS enrollment data to estimate the hospital-level costs per COMPASS enrollee. RESULTS: Between November 2017 and March 2019, 1582 patients received the COMPASS intervention across the 22 hospitals included in this analysis. Average annual hospital-level COMPASS costs were $2861 per patient (25th percentile: $735; 75th percentile: $3,475). Having 10% higher stroke patient volume was associated with 5.1% lower COMPASS costs per patient (P=0.016). About half (N=10) of hospitals reported postacute clinic visits as their highest-cost activity, while a third (N=7) reported case ascertainment (ie, identifying eligible patients) as their highest-cost activity. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the costs of implementing COMPASS varied across hospitals. On average, hospitals with higher stroke volume and higher enrollment reported lower costs per patient. Based on average costs of COMPASS and readmissions for stroke patients, COMPASS could lower net costs if the model is able to prevent about 6 readmissions per year.

Association of Mandatory Bundled Payments for Joint Replacement With Postacute Care Outcomes Among Medicare and Medicaid Dual Eligible Patients.

IMPORTANCE: The Medicare comprehensive care for joint replacement (CJR) model, a mandatory bundled payment program started in April 2016 for hospitals in randomly selected metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), may help reduce postacute care (PAC) use and episode costs, but its impact on disparities between Medicaid and non-Medicaid beneficiaries is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine effects of the CJR program on differences (or disparities) in PAC use and outcomes by Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational cohort study of 2013-2017, based on difference-in-differences (DID) analyses on Medicare data for 1,239,452 Medicare-only patients, 57,452 dual eligibles with full Medicaid benefits, and 50,189 dual eligibles with partial Medicaid benefits who underwent hip or knee surgery in hospitals of 75 CJR MSAs and 121 control MSAs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk-adjusted differences in rates of institutional PAC [skilled nursing facility (SNF), inpatient rehabilitation, or long-term hospital care] use and readmissions; and for the subgroup of patients discharged to SNF, risk-adjusted differences in SNF length of stay, payments, and quality measured by star ratings, rate of successful discharge to community, and rate of transition to long-stay nursing home resident. RESULTS: The CJR program was associated with reduced institutional PAC use and readmissions for patients in all 3 groups. For example, it was associated with reductions in 90-day readmission rate by 1.8 percentage point [DID estimate=-1.8; 95% confidence interval (CI), -2.6 to -0.9; P<0.001] for Medicare-only patients, by 1.6 percentage points (DID estimate=-1.6; 95% CI, -3.1 to -0.1; P=0.04) for full-benefit dual eligibles, and by 2.0 percentage points (DID estimate=-2.0; 95% CI, -3.6 to -0.4; P=0.01) for partial-benefit dual eligibles. These CJR-associated effects did not differ between dual eligibles (differences in above DID estimates=0.2; 95% CI, -1.4 to 1.7; P=0.81 for full-benefit patients; and -0.3; 95% CI, -1.9 to 1.3; P=0.74 for partial-benefit patients) and Medicare-only patients. Among patients discharged to SNF, the CJR program showed no effect on successful community discharge, transition to long-term care, or their persistent disparities. CONCLUSIONS: The CJR program did not help reduce persistent disparities in readmissions or SNF-specific outcomes related to Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility, likely due to its lack of financial incentives for reduced disparities and improved SNF outcomes.

Variation in Facility-Level Rates of All-Cause and Potentially Preventable 30-Day Hospital Readmissions Among Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries After Discharge From Postacute Inpatient Rehabilitation.

Importance: The Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 mandated a quality measure of potentially preventable 30-day hospital readmission for inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). Examining IRF performance nationally may help inform health care quality initiatives for Medicare beneficiaries. Objective: To examine variation in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Quality Reporting Program measures for US facility-level risk-adjusted all-cause and potentially preventable hospital readmission rates after inpatient rehabilitation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of Medicare claims data included 454 378 Medicare beneficiaries discharged from 1162 IRFs between June 1, 2013, and July 1, 2015. Data were analyzed March 23, 2018, through June 24, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities and the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation. Specifications from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were followed to identify the cohort, define outcomes, and calculate risk-standardized facility-level rates. Results: Among a cohort of 454 378 patients, the mean (SD) age was 76.2 (10.6) years and 263 546 (58.0%) were women. The all-cause readmission rate was 12.3% (95% CI, 12.2%-12.4%), and the potentially preventable readmission rate was 5.3% (95% CI, 5.3%-5.4%). Across 1162 included IRFs, risk-standardized all-cause readmission rates ranged from 10.1% (95% CI, 8.9%-11.6%) to 15.9% (95% CI, 13.6-18.6%) and potentially preventable readmission rates ranged from 4.3% (95% CI, 3.7%-5.4%) to 7.3% (95% CI, 5.7%-8.3%). Using the All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities, 16 IRFs (1.4%) had 95% CIs above the national mean rate, 1137 IRFs (97.9%) had 95% CIs containing the national mean rate, and 9 IRFs (0.8%) had 95% CIs below the national mean rate. Using the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation, 8 IRFs (0.7%) had 95% CIs above the national mean rate, 1153 IRFs (99.2%) had 95% CIs containing the national mean rate, and 1 IRF (0.1%) had a 95% CI below the national mean rate. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that readmission rates were lower when using the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation and further reduced discrimination between facilities compared with the recently discontinued All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities. This finding may indicate there is a lack of room for improvement in readmission rates. Given the rationale of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for removing measures that fail to discriminate quality performance, this suggests that the current readmission measure should not be implemented as part of the Inpatient Rehabilitation Quality Reporting Program.

Partnering in postacute darkness? CMS has data that will help.

Health systems will improve postacute outcomes when CMS begins sharing its performance data on nursing facility chains.

Quality of Post-Acute Care in Skilled Nursing Facilities That Disproportionately Serve Black and Hispanic Patients.

BACKGROUND: Understanding and addressing racial and ethnic disparities in the quality of post-acute care in skilled nursing facilities is an important health policy issue, particularly as the Medicare program initiates value-based payments for these institutions. METHODS: Our final cohort included 649,187 Medicare beneficiaries in either the fee-for-service or Medicare Advantage programs, who were 65 and older and were admitted to a skilled nursing facility following an acute hospital stay, from 8,375 skilled nursing facilities. We examined the quality of care in skilled nursing facilities that disproportionately serve minority patients compared to non-Hispanic whites. Three measures, all calculated at the level of the facility, were used to assess quality of care in skilled nursing facilities: (a) 30-day rehospitalization rate; (b) successful discharge from the facility to the community; and (c) Medicare five-star quality ratings. RESULTS: We found that African American post-acute patients are highly concentrated in a small number of institutions, with 28% of facilities accounting for 80% of all post-acute admissions for African American patients. Similarly, just 20% of facilities accounted for 80% of all admissions for Hispanics. Skilled nursing facilities with higher fractions of African American patients had worse performance for three publicly reported quality measures: rehospitalization, successful discharge to the community, and the star rating indicator. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to address disparities should focus attention on institutions that disproportionately serve minority patients and monitor unintended consequences of value-based payments to skilled nursing facilities.

The Five-Star Skilled Nursing Facility Rating System and Care of Disadvantaged Populations.

OBJECTIVES: To examine characteristics and locations of high- and low-quality skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and whether certain vulnerable individuals were differentially discharged to facilities with lower quality ratings. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Medicare-certified SNFs providing postacute care. PARTICIPANTS: SNF stays (N=1,195,166) of Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older admitted to 14,033 SNFs within 2 days of hospital discharge. MEASUREMENTS: We used Medicare claims from October 2013 to September 2014 and SNF 5-star ratings published on Nursing Home Compare. We describe the characteristics and populations of facilities according to quality, and the location of low (1 star) and high (5 stars) quality facilities. We used logistic regression models to estimate odds of admission to a low-quality facility after hospital discharge according to race, ethnicity, dual Medicare-Medicaid enrollment, functional status, discharge from a safety-net or low-quality hospital, and residence in a county with more low-quality SNFs. RESULTS: More than one-fifth (22.2%) of the facilities had a 5-star (high quality) rating, and 15.9% had a one-star (low quality) rating. Low-quality facilities were more likely to be in the south (44%), for profit (85%), and larger (>70 beds (86%)). Dual enrollment was the strongest predictor of admission to a 1-star facility (odds ratio (OR) = 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.51-1.55), although racial or ethnic minority status (black: OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.22-1.28; Hispanic: OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.06-1.14) and geographic prevalence of facilities (for a 10% increase in 1-star beds located in the county of individual's residence: OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.26-1.27) were also significant predictors. CONCLUSION: Vulnerable groups are more likely to be discharged to lower-quality facilities for postacute care. Policy-makers should monitor disparities in SNF quality. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:108-114, 2019.

Variant Post-acute Care Needs Measuring To Be Managed.

Areas of the country with high concentrations of long-term acute care hospitals or inpatient rehabilitation facilities often have much higher utilization rates, even if a skilled nursing facility or home health provider could provide care comparable in quality and at a much lower price.

Do hospital-owned skilled nursing facilities provide better post-acute care quality?

As hospitals are increasingly held accountable for patients' post-discharge outcomes under new payment models, hospitals may choose to acquire skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) to better manage these outcomes. This raises the question of whether patients discharged to hospital-based SNFs have better outcomes. In unadjusted comparisons, hospital-based SNF patients have much lower Medicare utilization in the 180 days following discharge relative to freestanding SNF patients. We solved the problem of differential selection into hospital-based and freestanding SNFs by using differential distance from home to the nearest hospital with a SNF relative to the distance from home to the nearest hospital without a SNF as an instrument. We found that hospital-based SNF patients spent roughly 5 more days in the community and 6 fewer days in the SNF in the 180 days following their original hospital discharge with no significant effect on mortality or hospital readmission.

Physicians With Defined Clear Care Pathways Have Better Discharge Disposition and Lower Cost.

BACKGROUND: There is a pronounced need for a sustainable care model for total joint arthroplasty in the United States. Total hip and knee arthroplasty is expected to increase 673% by 2030, and Medicare is the payor for a majority of these episodes. Our objective was to compare orthopedic cohort groups with and without defined postacute care pathways and the effects of the care pathways on service utilization and cost for Medicare patients in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement program. METHODS: Claims data for elective hip and knee arthroplasty episodes from a national bundled payments for care improvement database were the source of our study data. Independent reviewers were used to determine which groups had defined clinical pathways. The 2 cohort groups were then compared between those with defined clinical pathways and those without. Outcomes measures included postacute care costs, utilization rates (both frequency and length of time) for inpatient rehabilitation facilities, skilled nursing facilities, home health, and readmissions. RESULTS: Orthopedic physicians with defined postacute care pathways showed consistent decreases in cost and utilization as compared to physicians without defined postacute care pathways. Elective hip arthroplasty per episode cost differential was $3189 per episode between physicians with care pathways ($19,005) and those without ($22,195; P < .001). Elective knee arthroplasty per episode cost difference was $2466 per episode between physicians with care pathways ($18,866) and those without ($21,332; P < .001). Incident rates of utilization for postacute care services displayed significant differences between physicians with and without postacute care pathways. Physicians with defined postacute pathways demonstrated utilization reductions ranging from 7% to 79% with incident rate reductions ranging from 44% to 79%. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that orthopedic physicians with defined postacute care pathways affect discharge disposition. The findings show significant cost and utilization reductions for physicians with defined postacute care pathways.

State-of-the-science on postacute rehabilitation: measurement and methodologies for assessing quality and establishing policy for postacute care.

We present an overview of commonly used postacute outcome measures and review new methodologies for postacute assessment. We question the impact that current measurement has had on improvement of quality of postacute care (PAC) and its utility in informing health policy. We suggest that Donabedian's model of health care quality should be endorsed for measurement. Specifically, measurement of outcomes and process should be used jointly in assessment of PAC.

The uniform postacute assessment tool: systematically evaluating the quality of measurement evidence.

The U.S. Congress has mandated that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services develop a uniform assessment instrument that characterizes patients' needs for postacute services. What scientific criteria should be used to evaluate the evidence for such a tool? The validity of a measure can be accurately graded only if the constructs measured and their applications are clearly defined. We argue that improving postacute placement is the main purpose of the uniform postacute assessment (recently renamed the Continuity Assessment Record and Evaluation). We argue that placement itself needs to be better defined and measured in terms of transitions in the level and type of treatment and care. Domains that should be measured to provide appropriate rehabilitative placement recommendations include level of skilled medical and nursing care, therapies, routine living support, family support, ability to participate in self-care, and patient preference. Almost no research has been performed to quantify and predict the needed intensity of rehabilitative therapy, a major lacuna in evidence. Criteria and examples are provided for research that will provide minimal, probably adequate, or strong evidence for the validity of systems that recommend care transitions. A long-term program of research and systematic evidence synthesis is needed to support guidelines that improve postacute placement.

Doing better to do good: the impact of strategic adaptation on nursing home performance.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that a greater commitment to strategic adaptation, as exhibited by more extensive implementation of a subacute/rehabilitation care strategy in nursing homes, will be associated with superior performance. DATA SOURCES: Online Survey, Certification, and Reporting (OSCAR) data from 1997 to 2004, and the area resource file (ARF). STUDY DESIGN: The extent of strategic adaptation was measured by an aggregate weighted implementation score. Nursing home performance was measured by occupancy rate and two measures of payer mix. We conducted multivariate regression analyses using a cross-sectional time series generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to examine the effect of nursing home strategic implementation on each of the three performance measures, controlling for market and organizational characteristics that could influence nursing home performance. DATA COLLECTION/ABSTRACTION METHODS: OSCAR data was merged with relevant ARF data. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The results of our analysis provide strong support for the hypothesis. CONCLUSIONS: From a theoretical perspective, our findings confirm that organizations that adjust strategies and structures to better fit environmental demands achieve superior performance. From a managerial perspective, these results support the importance of proactive strategic leadership in the nursing home industry.

Admission and discharge guidelines for the pediatric patient requiring intermediate care.

During the past three decades, the specialty of pediatric critical care medicine has grown rapidly, leading to a number of pediatric intensive care units being opened across the country. Many patients who are admitted to the hospital require a higher level of care than the routine inpatient general pediatric care, yet not to the degree of intensity as pediatric critical care; therefore, an intermediate care level has been developed in institutions providing multiple disciplinary subspecialty pediatric care. These patients may require frequent monitoring of vital signs and nursing interventions but usually do not require invasive monitoring. The admission of the pediatric intermediate care patient is guided by physiologic parameters depending on the respective organ system involved relative to the institution's resources and capacity in caring for a patient in a general care environment. This report provides admission and discharge guidelines for intermediate pediatric care. Intermediate care promotes greater flexibility in patient triage and provides a cost-effective alternative to admission to a pediatric intensive care unit. This level of care may enhance the efficiency of care and improve the healthcare affordability for patients receiving intermediate care.

Short-form activity measure for post-acute care.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a comprehensive set of short forms using item response theory (IRT) and item pooling procedures for the purpose of monitoring postacute care functional recovery. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Six postacute health care networks in the greater Boston area, including inpatient acute rehabilitation, transitional care units, home care, and outpatient services. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 485 adult volunteers who were currently receiving skilled rehabilitation services. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We developed a set of 6 short forms across 3 activity domains from new items and items from existing postacute care instruments. RESULTS: Inpatient- and community-based short forms were developed for each of 3 activity domains: physical & movement, applied cognition, and personal care & instrumental. Items were selected for inclusion on the short forms to maximize content coverage and information value of items across the range of content and to minimize ceiling and floor effects. We were able to match the distribution of sample scores with very good item precision for 1 of the constructs (physical & movement); the other 2 domains (personal care & instrumental, applied cognition) were more challenging because of the variability in patient recovery and ceiling effects. CONCLUSIONS: ITR methods and item pooling procedures were valuable in developing paired sets of short-form instruments for inpatient and community rehabilitation that provided estimates of functioning along a common metric for use across postacute care settings.

Effects of using consumer and expert ratings of an activities of daily living scale on predicting functional outcomes of postacute care.

To test the effects of using preference weights for activities of daily living (ADL) outcome measures derived from different sources, data from a large study of the outcomes of postacute care (PAC study) were analyzed using two different weightings for the ADL measures. Both were developed using the same magnitude estimation technique; one from a panel of long-term care experts (the expert rating system); the other from a group of elderly Medicare beneficiaries (the consumer rating system). Neither group was directly involved in the PAC study. Although ADL scores generated by both rating systems were highly correlated prior to hospitalization and at hospital discharge, the consumer and expert rating systems generated significantly different functional outcomes measured by the change of ADL scores with a few exceptions. Compared to the consumer rating system, the expert rating system generated a greater change in functional outcomes at each of three follow-up time points after hospital discharge. This study suggests that the choice of weights for ADL items is important.

The future of subacute care.

Subacute care is a program of care for individuals with recent or current illness or injury. Currently, the services received by patients in subacute care vary considerably among sites, partly because these sites may specialize in certain treatments and partly because providers often define subacute care according to their own areas of expertise. Certain approaches to patient care, however, are universal regardless of diagnosis, and care that is given should be based on essential geriatric principles. In setting a standard for care in the subacute care setting, certain parameters must be clarified, including (1) defining subacute care, including what it is and what it is not; (2) selecting the right patient to receive subacute care; (3) making sure that care is centered on patients rather than sites or providers; and (4) ensuring that care is reimbursed adequately and appropriately. These issues are addressed, and guidelines on how to accomplish the goal of standardizing subacute care are provided.