Methods for Estimating Costs for Stays at Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities and Long-Term Care Hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare 3 methods for estimating stay-level Medicare facility (Part A) costs using claims and cost report data for inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) and long-term care hospitals (LTCHs), the 2 hospital-based postacute care providers. DESIGN: We calculated stay-level facility costs using different methods. Method 1 used routine costs per day and ancillary cost-to-charge ratios. Method 2 used routine and ancillary cost-to-charge ratios (freestanding IRFs and LTCHs only). Method 3 used facility-specific operating cost-to-charge ratios from the Provider Specific File. For each method, we compared the costs with payments and charges at the claim and facility levels and examined facility margins. SETTING: Data are from 1619 providers, including 266 freestanding IRFs, 909 IRF units, and 444 LTCHs. PARTICIPANTS: The analyses included 239,284 claims from 2014, of which 86,118 claims were from freestanding IRFs, 92,799 claims were from IRF units, and 60,367 claims were from LTCHs. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs and payments in 2014 United States Dollars. RESULTS: For freestanding IRFs, the mean facility stay-level costs were calculated to be $13,610 (method 1), $13,575 (method 2), and $13,783 (method 3). For IRF units, the mean facility stay-level costs were $17,385 (method 1) and $19,093 (method 3). For LTCHs, the mean facility stay-level costs were $36,362 (method 1), $36,407 (method 2), and $37,056 (method 3). CONCLUSIONS: The 3 methods resulted in small differences in facility mean stay-level costs. Using the facility-level cost-to-charge ratio (method 3) is the least resource-intensive method. Although more resource-intensive, using routine cost per day and ancillary cost-to-charge ratios (method 1) for cost calculations allows for differentiation in costs across patients based on differences in the mix of services used. As policymakers consider postacute care payment reforms, cost, rather than charge or payment data, needs to be calculated and the results of the methods compared.

Do Medicare Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Patients' Self-Care and Mobility Outcomes Vary by Dual Eligibility Status, Race and Ethnicity, Rural Residence, Socioeconomic Status, and Living Alone?

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) patients' risk-adjusted functional outcomes varied with five social drivers of health: Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility status, race and ethnicity, rural residence, socioeconomic status (SES), and living alone. DESIGN: This cohort study examined unadjusted and adjusted mobility and self-care change scores during IRF stays for 428,710 Medicare patients with and without social drivers of health. Regression models isolated the mean marginal effect of each of the five social factors on mobility and self-care change scores after adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Patients with full dual status had slightly lower risk-adjusted mobility and self-care improvement (-4.5% and -3.3%, respectively) compared to patients without dual status. Patients who identified as Black, Asian and Native Hawaiian had self-care marginal effects that were slightly lower (-4.8%, -4.1% and -3.7%, respectively) than patients who were White. Patients living in lower SES neighborhoods and patients who lived alone had slightly higher mobility and self-care improvement scores. Risk-adjusted marginal differences in improvement scores for patients with and without these social factors were small and did not meet the meaningfully different criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, IRF patients' risk-adjusted functional outcomes did not vary meaningfully by dual eligibility status, race or ethnicity, rural residence, SES or living alone.

Cross-setting Comparison of Risk Factors for Pressure Injuries Acquired in Post-Acute Care.

GENERAL PURPOSE: To provide information on the association between risk factors and the development of new or worsened stage 2 to 4 pressure injuries (PIs) in patients in long-term care hospitals (LTCHs), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), and skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. LEARNING OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant will:1. Compare the unadjusted PI incidence in SNF, IRF, and LTCH populations.2. Explain the extent to which the clinical risk factors of functional limitation (bed mobility), bowel incontinence, diabetes/peripheral vascular disease/peripheral arterial disease, and low body mass index are associated with new or worsened stage 2 to 4 PIs across the SNF, IRF, and LTCH populations.3. Compare the incidence of new or worsened stage 2 to 4 PI development in SNF, IRF, and LTCH populations associated with high body mass index, urinary incontinence, dual urinary and bowel incontinence, and advanced age.

Near real-time patient experience feedback with data relay to providers: a systematic review of its effectiveness.

Near Real-Time Feedback (NRTF) on the patient's experience with care, coupled with data relay to providers, can inform quality-of-care improvements, including at the point of care. The objective is to systematically review contemporary literature on the impact of the use of NRTF and data relay to providers on standardized patient experience measures. Six scientific databases and five specialty journals were searched supplemented by snowballing search strategies, according to the registered study protocol. Eligibility included studies in English (2015-2023) assessing the impact of NRTF and data relay on standardized patient-reported experience measures as a primary outcome. Eligibility and quality appraisals were performed by two independent reviewers. An expert former patient (Patient and Family Advisory Council and communication sciences background) helped interpret the results. Eight papers met review eligibility criteria, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one non-randomized study. Three of these studies involved in-person NRTF prior to data relay (patient-level data for immediate corrective action or aggregated and peer-compared) and led to significantly better results in all or some of the experience measures. In turn, a kiosk-based NRTF achieved no better experience results. The remaining studies were pre-post designs with mixed or neutral results and greater risks of bias. In-person NRTF on the patient experience followed by rapid data relay to their providers, either patient-level or provider-level as peer-compared, can improve the patient experience of care. Reviewed kiosk-based or self-reported approaches combined with data relay were not effective. Further research should determine which approach (e.g. who conducts the in-person NRTF) will provide better, more efficient improvements and under which circumstances.

Forecasting the Economic Burden of Cardiovascular Disease and Stroke in the United States Through 2050: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying the economic burden of cardiovascular disease and stroke over the coming decades may inform policy, health system, and community-level interventions for prevention and treatment. METHODS: We used nationally representative health, economic, and demographic data to project health care costs attributable to key cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia) and conditions (coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation) through 2050. The human capital approach was used to estimate productivity losses from morbidity and premature mortality due to cardiovascular conditions. RESULTS: One in 3 US adults received care for a cardiovascular risk factor or condition in 2020. Annual inflation-adjusted (2022 US dollars) health care costs of cardiovascular risk factors are projected to triple between 2020 and 2050, from $400 billion to $1344 billion. For cardiovascular conditions, annual health care costs are projected to almost quadruple, from $393 billion to $1490 billion, and productivity losses are projected to increase by 54%, from $234 billion to $361 billion. Stroke is projected to account for the largest absolute increase in costs. Large relative increases among the Asian American population (497%) and Hispanic American population (489%) reflect the projected increases in the size of these populations. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of cardiovascular risk factors and overt cardiovascular disease in the United States is projected to increase substantially in the coming decades. Development and deployment of cost-effective programs and policies to promote cardiovascular health are urgently needed to rein in costs and to equitably enhance population health.

Systematic review of contemporary interventions for improving discharge support and transitions of care from the patient experience perspective.

AIM: To synthesize the impact of improvement interventions related to care coordination, discharge support and care transitions on patient experience measures. METHOD: Systematic review. Searches were completed in six scientific databases, five specialty journals, and through snowballing. Eligibility included studies published in English (2015-2023) focused on improving care coordination, discharge support, or transitional care assessed by standardized patient experience measures as a primary outcome. Two independent reviewers made eligibility decisions and performed quality appraisals. RESULTS: Of 1240 papers initially screened, 16 were included. Seven studies focused on care coordination activities, including three randomized controlled trials [RCTs]. These studies used enhanced supports such as improvement coaching or tailoring for vulnerable populations within Patient-Centered Medical Homes or other primary care sites. Intervention effectiveness was mixed or neutral relative to standard or models of care or simpler supports (e.g., improvement tool). Eight studies, including three RCTs, focused on enhanced discharge support, including patient education (e.g., teach back) and telephone follow-up; mixed or neutral results on the patient experience were also found and with more substantive risks of bias. One pragmatic trial on a transitional care intervention, using a navigator support, found significant changes only for the subset of uninsured patients and in one patient experience outcome, and had challenges with implementation fidelity. CONCLUSION: Enhanced supports for improving care coordination, discharge education, and post-discharge follow-up had mixed or neutral effectiveness for improving the patient experience with care, compared to standard care or simpler improvement approaches. There is a need to advance the body of evidence on how to improve the patient experience with discharge support and transitional approaches.

Trends in the characteristics and outcomes of older patients with non-traumatic spinal cord injury treated in inpatient rehabilitation facilities: 2013-2018.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics and outcomes of older (≥ 65 years of age) patients with a non-traumatic spinal cord injury (NTSCI) treated in inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) between 2013 and 2018. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: IRFs in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 93,631 IRF Medicare stays for patients with NTSCI. INTERVENTIONS: Not Applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of stay, self-care and mobility function, discharge destination. RESULTS: Between 2013 and 2018, the number of older (≥ 65 years of age) Medicare patients with a NTSCI treated in IRFs increased about 22.1 percent, from 14,149 to 17,275. In addition to the increase, patients' sociodemographic characteristics shifted to have a slightly higher percentage of patients aged 65-74 years, a slightly higher percentage of males, and slightly fewer patients who identified as Hispanic. There was also a trend of more patients in the higher acuity case-mix groups and comorbidities tiers, but the median length of stay remained 12 days across all years. The percent of patients discharged home or to a community-based setting varied from 73.7 to 75.2 without a trend, although discharge self-care and mobility function increased slightly across the years. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2013 and 2018, the number of Medicare patients with NTSCI treated in IRFs increased by more than 22 percent. While patient complexity increased, the median length of stay remained 12 days across the years. Discharge self-care and mobility function increased slightly, and the percent of patients discharged home ranged from 73.7 to 75.2 across the years.

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.

Reliability and Validity of the Minimum Data Set 3.0 Standardized Self-Care and Mobility Data Elements Among Long-Stay Nursing Home Residents.

PURPOSE: To assess the reliability and validity of a subset of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) 3.0 Section GG data elements (i.e., standardized self-care, mobility) among 147 long-stay nursing home residents in seven nursing homes in five states. METHOD: Trained clinicians assessed residents' functional abilities using select Section GG items and Section G activities of daily living items. We examined the reliability and construct validity of the data using Cronbach's alpha, correlations between Section G and Section GG items, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and Rasch measurement analysis. RESULTS: We observed acceptable internal consistency values for all (0.98), self-care (0.93), and mobility (0.98) standardized items. Correlations between conceptually related Section G and Section GG items ranged from -0.53 to -0.84. CFA findings found acceptable values for all fit indices. Rasch analysis showed most items had acceptable fit statistics, except for the easiest and most difficult activities. CONCLUSION: These findings establish the feasibility of data collection, internal consistency reliability, and construct validity of the selected Section GG items among long-stay nursing home residents. Use of the same standardized data elements in post-acute and long-term care populations can support improved coding of function and enhance our understanding of resident functioning. [Research in Gerontological Nursing, 17(2), 57-64.].

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.

Cross-setting Comparison of Risk Factors for Pressure Injuries Acquired in Post-Acute Care.

GENERAL PURPOSE: To provide information on the association between risk factors and the development of new or worsened stage 2 to 4 pressure injuries (PIs) in patients in long-term care hospitals (LTCHs), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), and skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. LEARNING OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant will:1. Compare the unadjusted PI incidence in SNF, IRF, and LTCH populations.2. Explain the extent to which the clinical risk factors of functional limitation (bed mobility), bowel incontinence, diabetes/peripheral vascular disease/peripheral arterial disease, and low body mass index are associated with new or worsened stage 2 to 4 PIs across the SNF, IRF, and LTCH populations.3. Compare the incidence of new or worsened stage 2 to 4 PI development in SNF, IRF, and LTCH populations associated with high body mass index, urinary incontinence, dual urinary and bowel incontinence, and advanced age.

To compare the incidence of new or worsened pressure injuries (PIs) and associated risk factors for their development in inpatient post-acute care settings: long-term care hospitals (LTCHs), inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), and skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). The authors investigated Medicare Part A SNF resident stays and LTCH patient stays that ended between October 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016 and IRF patient stays that ended between October 1, 2016 and March 31, 2017. They calculated the incidence of new or worsened PIs using the specifications of the National Quality Forum-endorsed PI quality measure #0678: Percent of Residents or Patients with Pressure Ulcers that are New or Worsened . The incidences of new or worsened stages 2 through 4 PIs varied across settings: 1.23% in SNFs, 1.56% in IRFs, and 3.07% in LTCHs. Seven risk factors were positively and consistently associated with new or worsened PIs across settings: limited bed mobility, bowel incontinence, low body mass index, diabetes/peripheral vascular disease/peripheral arterial disease, advanced age, urinary incontinence, and dual urinary and bowel incontinence. These findings provide empirical support for the alignment of risk factors for the PI quality measures across post-acute care settings.

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.

Quality Measure Concepts for Inpatient Rehabilitation That Are Best Understood From the Patient's Perspective.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify inpatient rehabilitation quality-of-care concepts that are best understood from the patient perspective. DESIGN: We conducted 12 focus groups with 95 former patients, caregivers, and rehabilitation clinicians and asked them to describe high-quality inpatient rehabilitation care. METHODS: We independently reviewed the focus group transcripts and then used an iterative process to identify the quality measure concepts identified by participants. RESULTS: Based on participants' comments, we identified 18 quality measure concepts: respect and dignity, clinician communication with patient, clinician communication with family, organizational culture, clinician engagement with patient, clinician engagement with family, rehabilitation goals, staff expertise, responsiveness, patient safety, physical environment, care coordination, discharge planning, patient and family education, peer support, symptom management (pain, anxiety, fatigue, sadness), sleep, and functioning. CLINICAL RELEVANCE TO THE PRACTICE OF REHABILITATION NURSING: Rehabilitation nurses should be aware of the quality-of-care issues that are important to patients and their caregivers. CONCLUSION: Important patient-reported domains of quality of care include interpersonal relationships, patient and family engagement, care planning and delivery, access to support, and quality of life.

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.

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.