Association of Frailty with Healthcare Utilization for Patients over One Year Following Surgical Evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Characterize the distribution of healthcare utilization associated with pre-operative frailty in the year following evaluation by a surgeon. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Frailty is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and costs for surgical patients. However, the total financial burden for frail patients beyond the index surgery and inpatient stay remains unknown. METHODS: Prospective cohort assembled from February 2016 to December 2020 within a multi-hospital integrated healthcare delivery and finance system (IDFS), from patients evaluated with the Risk Analysis Index (RAI) of frailty. Inclusion criteria: age greater than 18, valid RAI, membership in the IDFS Health Plan. Data were stratified by frailty and surgical status. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age was 54.7 (16.1) and 58.2% female of the cohort (n=86,572). For all patients with reimbursement for surgery (n=53,856), frail and very frail patients incurred respective increases of 8% ( P =0.027) and 29% ( P <0.001) on utilization relative to the normal group. Robust patients saw a 52% ( P <0.001) decrease. This pattern was more pronounced in the cohort without surgery (n=32,716). The increase over normal utilization for frail and very frail patients increased to 23% ( P =0.004) and 68% ( P <0.001), respectively. Utilization among robust patients decreased 62% ( P <0.001). Increases among the frail were primarily due to increased inpatient medical and post-acute care services (all P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patient frailty is associated with increased total healthcare utilization, primarily via increased inpatient medical and post-acute care following surgery. Quantifying these frailty-related financial burdens may inform clinical decision making as well as the design of value-based reimbursement strategies.

Using Appendicitis to Improve Estimates of Childhood Medicaid Participation Rates.

OBJECTIVE: Administrative data are often used to estimate state Medicaid/Children's Health Insurance Program duration of enrollment and insurance continuity, but they are generally not used to estimate participation (the fraction of eligible children enrolled) because administrative data do not include reasons for disenrollment and cannot observe eligible never-enrolled children, causing estimates of eligible unenrolled to be inaccurate. Analysts are therefore forced to either utilize survey information that is not generally linkable to administrative claims or rely on duration and continuity measures derived from administrative data and forgo estimating claims-based participation. We introduce appendectomy-based participation (ABP) to estimate statewide participation rates using claims by taking advantage of a natural experiment around statewide appendicitis admissions to improve the accuracy of participation rate estimates. METHODS: We used Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) for 2008-2010; and the American Community Survey for 2008-2010 from 43 states to calculate ABP, continuity ratio, duration, and participation based on the American Community Survey (ACS). RESULTS: In the validation study, median participation rate using ABP was 86% versus 87% for ACS-based participation estimates using logical edits and 84% without logical edits. Correlations between ABP and ACS with or without logical edits was 0.86 (P < .0001). Using regression analysis, ABP alone was a significant predictor of ACS (P < .0001) with or without logical edits, and adding duration and/or the continuity ratio did not significantly improve the model. CONCLUSION: Using the ABP rate derived from administrative claims (MAX) is a valid method to estimate statewide public insurance participation rates in children.

Auditing Practice Style Variation in Pediatric Inpatient Asthma Care.

IMPORTANCE: Asthma is the most prevalent chronic illness among children, remaining a leading cause of pediatric hospitalizations and representing a major financial burden to many health care systems. OBJECTIVE: To implement a new auditing process examining whether differences in hospital practice style may be associated with potential resource savings or inefficiencies in treating pediatric asthma admissions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective matched-cohort design study, matched for asthma severity, compared practice patterns for patients admitted to Children's Hospital Association hospitals contributing data to the Pediatric Hospital Information System (PHIS) database. With 3 years of PHIS data on 48 887 children, an asthma template was constructed consisting of representative children hospitalized for asthma between April 1, 2011, and March 31, 2014. The template was matched with either a 1:1, 2:1, or 3:1 ratio at each of 37 tertiary care children's hospitals, depending on available sample size. EXPOSURE: Treatment at each PHIS hospital. MAIN OUTCOMESS AND MEASURES: Cost, length of stay, and intensive care unit (ICU) utilization. RESULTS: After matching patients (n = 9100; mean [SD] age, 7.1 [3.6] years; 3418 [37.6%] females) to the template (n = 100, mean [SD] age, 7.2 [3.7] years; 37 [37.0%] females), there was no significant difference in observable patient characteristics at the 37 hospitals meeting the matching criteria. Despite similar characteristics of the patients, we observed large and significant variation in use of the ICUs as well as in length of stay and cost. For the same template-matched populations, comparing utilization between the 12.5th percentile (lower eighth) and 87.5th percentile (upper eighth) of hospitals, median cost varied by 87% ($3157 vs $5912 per patient; P < .001); total hospital length of stay varied by 47% (1.5 vs 2.2 days; P < .001); and ICU utilization was 254% higher (6.5% vs 23.0%; P < .001). Furthermore, the patterns of resource utilization by patient risk differed significantly across hospitals. For example, as patient risk increased one hospital displayed significantly increasing costs compared with their matched controls (comparative cost difference: lowest risk, -34.21%; highest risk, 53.27%; P < .001). In contrast, another hospital displayed significantly decreasing costs relative to their matched controls as patient risk increased (comparative cost difference: lowest risk, -10.12%; highest risk, -16.85%; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For children with asthma who had similar characteristics, we observed different hospital resource utilization; some values differed greatly, with important differences by initial patient risk. Through the template matching audit, hospitals and stakeholders can better understand where this excess variation occurs and can help to pinpoint practice styles that should be emulated or avoided.

Indirect Standardization Matching: Assessing Specific Advantage and Risk Synergy.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a method to allow a hospital to compare its performance using its entire patient population to the outcomes of very similar patients treated elsewhere. DATA SOURCES/SETTING: Medicare claims in orthopedics and common general, gynecologic, and urologic surgery from Illinois, New York, and Texas from 2004 to 2006. STUDY DESIGN: Using two example "focal" hospitals, each hospital's patients were matched to 10 very similar patients selected from 619 other hospitals. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: All patients were used at each focal hospital, and we found the 10 closest matched patients from control hospitals with exactly the same principal procedure as each focal patient. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We achieved exact matches on all procedures and very close matches for other patient characteristics for both hospitals. There were few to no differences between each hospital's patients and their matched control patients on most patient characteristics, yet large and significant differences were observed for mortality, failure-to-rescue, and cost. CONCLUSION: Indirect standardization matching can produce fair audits of quality and cost, allowing for a comprehensive, transparent, and relevant assessment of all patients at a focal hospital. With this approach, hospitals will be better able to benchmark their performance and determine where quality improvement is most needed.

Comparison of the Value of Nursing Work Environments in Hospitals Across Different Levels of Patient Risk.

IMPORTANCE: The literature suggests that hospitals with better nursing work environments provide better quality of care. Less is known about value (cost vs quality). OBJECTIVES: To test whether hospitals with better nursing work environments displayed better value than those with worse nursing environments and to determine patient risk groups associated with the greatest value. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective matched-cohort design, comparing the outcomes and cost of patients at focal hospitals recognized nationally as having good nurse working environments and nurse-to-bed ratios of 1 or greater with patients at control group hospitals without such recognition and with nurse-to-bed ratios less than 1. This study included 25 752 elderly Medicare general surgery patients treated at focal hospitals and 62 882 patients treated at control hospitals during 2004-2006 in Illinois, New York, and Texas. The study was conducted between January 1, 2004, and November 30, 2006; this analysis was conducted from April to August 2015. EXPOSURES: Focal vs control hospitals (better vs worse nursing environment). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Thirty-day mortality and costs reflecting resource utilization. RESULTS: This study was conducted at 35 focal hospitals (mean nurse-to-bed ratio, 1.51) and 293 control hospitals (mean nurse-to-bed ratio, 0.69). Focal hospitals were larger and more teaching and technology intensive than control hospitals. Thirty-day mortality in focal hospitals was 4.8% vs 5.8% in control hospitals (P < .001), while the cost per patient was similar: the focal-control was -$163 (95% CI = -$542 to $215; P = .40), suggesting better value in the focal group. For the focal vs control hospitals, the greatest mortality benefit (17.3% vs 19.9%; P < .001) occurred in patients in the highest risk quintile, with a nonsignificant cost difference of $941 per patient ($53 701 vs $52 760; P = .25). The greatest difference in value between focal and control hospitals appeared in patients in the second-highest risk quintile, with mortality of 4.2% vs 5.8% (P < .001), with a nonsignificant cost difference of -$862 ($33 513 vs $34 375; P = .12). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hospitals with better nursing environments and above-average staffing levels were associated with better value (lower mortality with similar costs) compared with hospitals without nursing environment recognition and with below-average staffing, especially for higher-risk patients. These results do not suggest that improving any specific hospital's nursing environment will necessarily improve its value, but they do show that patients undergoing general surgery at hospitals with better nursing environments generally receive care of higher value.

Examining Causes of Racial Disparities in General Surgical Mortality: Hospital Quality Versus Patient Risk.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in general surgical outcomes are known to exist but not well understood. OBJECTIVES: To determine if black-white disparities in general surgery mortality for Medicare patients are attributable to poorer health status among blacks on admission or differences in the quality of care provided by the admitting hospitals. RESEARCH DESIGN: Matched cohort study using Tapered Multivariate Matching. SUBJECTS: All black elderly Medicare general surgical patients (N=18,861) and white-matched controls within the same 6 states or within the same 838 hospitals. MEASURES: Thirty-day mortality (primary); others include in-hospital mortality, failure-to-rescue, complications, length of stay, and readmissions. RESULTS: Matching on age, sex, year, state, and the exact same procedure, blacks had higher 30-day mortality (4.0% vs. 3.5%, P<0.01), in-hospital mortality (3.9% vs. 2.9%, P<0.0001), in-hospital complications (64.3% vs. 56.8% P<0.0001), and failure-to-rescue rates (6.1% vs. 5.1%, P<0.001), longer length of stay (7.2 vs. 5.8 d, P<0.0001), and more 30-day readmissions (15.0% vs. 12.5%, P<0.0001). Adding preoperative risk factors to the above match, there was no significant difference in mortality or failure-to-rescue, and all other outcome differences were small. Blacks matched to whites in the same hospital displayed no significant differences in mortality, failure-to-rescue, or readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: Black and white Medicare patients undergoing the same procedures with closely matched risk factors displayed similar mortality, suggesting that racial disparities in general surgical mortality are not because of differences in hospital quality. To reduce the observed disparities in surgical outcomes, the poorer health of blacks on presentation for surgery must be addressed.

Racial disparities in colon cancer survival: a matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Differences in colon cancer survival by race are a recognized problem among Medicare beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To determine to what extent the racial disparity in survival is due to disparity in presentation characteristics at diagnosis or disparity in subsequent treatment. DESIGN: Black patients with colon cancer were matched with 3 groups of white patients: a "demographic characteristics" match controlling for age, sex, diagnosis year, and Survey, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) site; a "presentation" match controlling for demographic characteristics plus comorbid conditions and tumor characteristics, including stage and grade; and a "treatment" match, including presentation variables plus details of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. SETTING: 16 U.S. SEER sites. PATIENTS: 7677 black patients aged 65 years or older diagnosed between 1991 and 2005 in the SEER-Medicare database and 3 sets of 7677 matched white patients, followed until 31 December 2009. MEASUREMENTS: 5-year survival. RESULTS: The absolute difference in 5-year survival between black and white patients was 9.9% (95% CI, 8.3% to 11.4%; P<0.001) in the demographic characteristics match. This disparity remained unchanged between 1991 and 2005. After matching for presentation characteristics, the difference decreased to 4.9% (CI, 3.6% to 6.1%; P<0.001). After additional matching for treatment, this difference decreased to 4.3% (CI, 2.9% to 5.5%; P<0.001). The disparity in survival attributed to treatment differences made up only an absolute 0.6% of the overall 9.9% survival disparity. LIMITATION: An observational study limited to elderly Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries living in selected geographic areas. CONCLUSION: Racial disparities in colon cancer survival did not decrease among patients diagnosed between 1991 and 2005. This persistent disparity seemed to be more related to presentation characteristics at diagnosis than to subsequent treatment differences. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and National Science Foundation.

A hospital-specific template for benchmarking its cost and quality.

OBJECTIVE: Develop an improved method for auditing hospital cost and quality tailored to a specific hospital's patient population. DATA SOURCES/SETTING: Medicare claims in general, gynecologic and urologic surgery, and orthopedics from Illinois, New York, and Texas between 2004 and 2006. STUDY DESIGN: A template of 300 representative patients from a single index hospital was constructed and used to match 300 patients at 43 hospitals that had a minimum of 500 patients over a 3-year study period. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: From each of 43 hospitals we chose 300 patients most resembling the template using multivariate matching. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We found close matches on procedures and patient characteristics, far more balanced than would be expected in a randomized trial. There were little to no differences between the index hospital's template and the 43 hospitals on most patient characteristics yet large and significant differences in mortality, failure-to-rescue, and cost. CONCLUSION: Matching can produce fair, directly standardized audits. From the perspective of the index hospital, "hospital-specific" template matching provides the fairness of direct standardization with the specific institutional relevance of indirect standardization. Using this approach, hospitals will be better able to examine their performance, and better determine why they are achieving the results they observe.

Anesthesia technique, mortality, and length of stay after hip fracture surgery.

IMPORTANCE: More than 300,000 hip fractures occur each year in the United States. Recent practice guidelines have advocated greater use of regional anesthesia for hip fracture surgery. OBJECTIVE: To test the association of regional (ie, spinal or epidural) anesthesia vs general anesthesia with 30-day mortality and hospital length of stay after hip fracture. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: We conducted a matched retrospective cohort study involving patients 50 years or older who were undergoing surgery for hip fracture at general acute care hospitals in New York State between July 1, 2004, and December 31, 2011. Our main analysis was a near-far instrumental variable match that paired patients who lived at different distances from hospitals that specialized in regional or general anesthesia. Supplementary analyses included a within-hospital match that paired patients within the same hospital and an across-hospital match that paired patients at different hospitals. EXPOSURES: Spinal or epidural anesthesia; general anesthesia. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Thirty-day mortality and hospital length of stay. Because the distribution of length of stay had long tails, we characterized this outcome using the Huber M estimate with Huber weights, a robust estimator similar to a trimmed mean. RESULTS: Of 56,729 patients, 15,904 (28%) received regional anesthesia and 40,825 (72%) received general anesthesia. Overall, 3032 patients (5.3%) died. The M estimate of the length of stay was 6.2 days (95% CI, 6.2 to 6.2). The near-far matched analysis showed no significant difference in 30-day mortality by anesthesia type among the 21,514 patients included in this match: 583 of 10,757 matched patients (5.4%) who lived near a regional anesthesia-specialized hospital died vs 629 of 10,757 matched patients (5.8%) who lived near a general anesthesia-specialized hospital (instrumental variable estimate of risk difference, -1.1%; 95% CI, -2.8 to 0.5; P = .20). Supplementary analyses of within and across hospital patient matches yielded mortality findings to be similar to the main analysis. In the near-far match, regional anesthesia was associated with a 0.6-day shorter length of stay than general anesthesia (95% CI, -0.8 to -0.4, P < .001). Supplementary analyses also showed regional anesthesia to be associated with shorter length of stay, although the observed association was smaller in magnitude than in the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among adults in acute care hospitals in New York State undergoing hip repair, the use of regional anesthesia compared with general anesthesia was not associated with lower 30-day mortality but was associated with a modestly shorter length of stay. These findings do not support a mortality benefit for regional anesthesia in this setting.

Template matching for auditing hospital cost and quality.

OBJECTIVE: Develop an improved method for auditing hospital cost and quality. DATA SOURCES/SETTING: Medicare claims in general, gynecologic and urologic surgery, and orthopedics from Illinois, Texas, and New York between 2004 and 2006. STUDY DESIGN: A template of 300 representative patients was constructed and then used to match 300 patients at hospitals that had a minimum of 500 patients over a 3-year study period. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: From each of 217 hospitals we chose 300 patients most resembling the template using multivariate matching. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The matching algorithm found close matches on procedures and patient characteristics, far more balanced than measured covariates would be in a randomized clinical trial. These matched samples displayed little to no differences across hospitals in common patient characteristics yet found large and statistically significant hospital variation in mortality, complications, failure-to-rescue, readmissions, length of stay, ICU days, cost, and surgical procedure length. Similar patients at different hospitals had substantially different outcomes. CONCLUSION: The template-matched sample can produce fair, directly standardized audits that evaluate hospitals on patients with similar characteristics, thereby making benchmarking more believable. Through examining matched samples of individual patients, administrators can better detect poor performance at their hospitals and better understand why these problems are occurring.

Characteristics associated with differences in survival among black and white women with breast cancer.

IMPORTANCE: Difference in breast cancer survival by race is a recognized problem among Medicare beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To determine if racial disparity in breast cancer survival is primarily attributable to differences in presentation characteristics at diagnosis or subsequent treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Comparison of 7375 black women 65 years and older diagnosed between 1991 to 2005 and 3 sets of 7375 matched white control patients selected from 99,898 white potential controls, using data for 16 US Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) sites in the SEER-Medicare database. All patients received follow-up through December 31, 2009, and the black case patients were matched to 3 white control populations on demographics (age, year of diagnosis, and SEER site), presentation (demographics variables plus patient comorbid conditions and tumor characteristics such as stage, size, grade, and estrogen receptor status), and treatment (presentation variables plus details of surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: 5-Year survival. RESULTS: The absolute difference in 5-year survival (blacks, 55.9%; whites, 68.8%) was 12.9% (95% CI, 11.5%-14.5%; P < .001) in the demographics match. This difference remained unchanged between 1991 and 2005. After matching on presentation characteristics, the absolute difference in 5-year survival was 4.4% (95% CI, 2.8%-5.8%; P < .001) and was 3.6% (95% CI, 2.3%-4.9%; P < .001) lower for blacks than for whites matched also on treatment. In the presentation match, fewer blacks received treatment (87.4% vs 91.8%; P < .001), time from diagnosis to treatment was longer (29.2 vs 22.8 days; P < .001), use of anthracyclines and taxols was lower (3.7% vs 5.0%; P < .001), and breast-conserving surgery without other treatment was more frequent (8.2% vs 7.3%; P = .04). Nevertheless, differences in survival associated with treatment differences accounted for only 0.81% of the 12.9% survival difference. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the SEER-Medicare database, differences in breast cancer survival between black and white women did not substantially change among women diagnosed between 1991 and 2005. These differences in survival appear primarily related to presentation characteristics at diagnosis rather than treatment differences.

Racial disparities in operative procedure time: the influence of obesity.

BACKGROUND: Using Pennsylvania Medicare claims from 1995 to 1996, the authors previously reported that anesthesia procedure length appears longer in blacks than whites. In a new study using a different and larger data set, the authors now examine whether body mass index (BMI), not available in Medicare claims, explains this difference. The authors also examine the relative contributions of surgical and anesthesia times. METHODS: The Obesity and Surgical Outcomes Study of 47 hospitals throughout Illinois, New York, and Texas abstracted chart information including BMI on elder Medicare patients (779 blacks and 14,596 whites) undergoing hip and knee replacement and repair, colectomy, and thoracotomy between 2002 and 2006. The authors matched all black Medicare patients to comparable whites and compared procedure lengths. RESULTS: Mean BMI in the black and white populations was 30.24 and 28.96 kg/m, respectively (P<0.0001). After matching on age, sex, procedure, comorbidities, hospital, and BMI, mean white BMI in the comparison group was 30.1 kg/m (P=0.94). The typical matched pair difference (black-white) in anesthesia (induction to recovery room) procedure time was 7.0 min (P=0.0019), of which 6 min reflected the surgical (cut-to-close) time difference (P=0.0032). Within matched pairs, where the difference in procedure times was greater than 30 min between patients, blacks more commonly had longer procedure times (Odds=1.39; P=0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: Controlling for patient characteristics, BMI, and hospital, elder black Medicare patients experienced slightly but significantly longer procedure length than their closely matched white controls. Procedure length difference was almost completely due to surgery, not anesthesia.

Comparative effectiveness of regional versus general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery in adults.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is a common, morbid, and costly event among older adults. Data are inconclusive as to whether epidural or spinal (regional) anesthesia improves outcomes after hip fracture surgery. METHODS: The authors examined a retrospective cohort of patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture in 126 hospitals in New York in 2007 and 2008. They tested the association of a record indicating receipt of regional versus general anesthesia with a primary outcome of inpatient mortality and with secondary outcomes of pulmonary and cardiovascular complications using hospital fixed-effects logistic regressions. Subgroup analyses tested the association of anesthesia type and outcomes according to fracture anatomy. RESULTS: Of 18,158 patients, 5,254 (29%) received regional anesthesia. In-hospital mortality occurred in 435 (2.4%). Unadjusted rates of mortality and cardiovascular complications did not differ by anesthesia type. Patients receiving regional anesthesia experienced fewer pulmonary complications (359 [6.8%] vs. 1,040 [8.1%], P < 0.005). Regional anesthesia was associated with a lower adjusted odds of mortality (odds ratio: 0.710, 95% CI 0.541, 0.932, P = 0.014) and pulmonary complications (odds ratio: 0.752, 95% CI 0.637, 0.887, P < 0.0001) relative to general anesthesia. In subgroup analyses, regional anesthesia was associated with improved survival and fewer pulmonary complications among patients with intertrochanteric fractures but not among patients with femoral neck fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Regional anesthesia is associated with a lower odds of inpatient mortality and pulmonary complications among all hip fracture patients compared with general anesthesia; this finding may be driven by a trend toward improved outcomes with regional anesthesia among patients with intertrochanteric fractures.