Quality of medical care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries: A profile at state and national levels.

CONTEXT: Despite condition-specific and managed care-specific reports, no systematic program has been developed for monitoring the quality of medical care provided to Medicare beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To create a monitoring system for a range of measures of clinical performance that supports quality improvement and provides repeated, reliable estimates at the national and state levels for fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: National study of repeated, cross-sectional observational data collected in 1997-1999 on all Medicare FFS beneficiaries or on a representative sample of beneficiaries with a particular condition. Data were collected using medical record abstraction for inpatient care, analysis of Medicare claims for some ambulatory services, and surveys for immunization rates. Separate samples were drawn for each topic for each state. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Beneficiary patients' receipt of 24 process-of-care measures related to primary prevention, secondary prevention, or treatment of 6 medical conditions (acute myocardial infarction, breast cancer, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, pneumonia, and stroke) for which there is strong scientific evidence and professional consensus that the process of care either directly improves outcomes or is a necessary step in a chain of care that does so. RESULTS: Across all states for all measures, the percentage of patients receiving appropriate care in the median state ranged from a high of 95% (avoidance of sublingual nifedipine for patients with acute stroke) to a low of 11% (patients with pneumonia screened for pneumococcal immunization status before discharge). The median performance on an indicator is 69% (patients discharged with heart failure diagnosis who received angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; diabetic patients having an eye examination in the last 2 years). Some states (particularly less populous states and those in the Northeast) consistently ranked high in relative performance while others (particularly more populous states and those in the Southeast) consistently ranked low. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to assemble information on a diverse set of clinical performance measures that represent performance on the range of services in a health insurance program. These findings indicate substantial opportunities to improve the care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries and urgently invite a partnership among practitioners, hospitals, health plans, and purchasers to achieve that improvement. JAMA. 2000;284:1670-1676.

Improving the quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction: results from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

CONTEXT: Medicare has a legislative mandate for quality assurance, but the effectiveness of its population-based quality improvement programs has been difficult to establish. OBJECTIVE: To improve the quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction. DESIGN: Quality improvement project with baseline measurement, feedback, remeasurement, and comparison samples. SETTING: All acute care hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: Preintervention and postintervention samples included all Medicare patients in Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, and Wisconsin discharged with principal diagnoses of acute myocardial infarctions during 2 periods, June 1992 through December 1992 and August 1995 through November 1995. Indicator comparisons were made with a random sample of Medicare patients in the rest of the nation discharged with acute myocardial infarctions from August 1995 through November 1995. Mortality comparisons involved all Medicare patients nationwide with inpatient claims for acute myocardial infarctions during 2 periods, June 1992 through May 1993 and August 1995 through July 1996. INTERVENTION: Data feedback by peer review organizations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality indicators derived from clinical practice guidelines, length of stay, and mortality. RESULTS: Performance on all quality indicators improved significantly in the 4 pilot states. Administration of aspirin during hospitalization in patients without contraindications improved from 84% to 90% (P< .001), and prescription of beta-blockers at discharge improved from 47% to 68% (P < .001). Mortality at 30 days decreased from 18.9% to 17.1% (P = .005) and at 1 year from 32.3% to 29.6% (P < .001). These improvements in quality occurred during a period when median length of stay decreased from 8 days to 6 days. Performance on all quality indicators except reperfusion was better in the pilot states than in the rest of the nation in 1995, and the differences were statistically significant for aspirin use at discharge (P < .001), beta-blocker use (P < .001), and smoking cessation counseling (P = .02). Postinfarction mortality was not significantly different between the pilot states and the rest of the nation during the baseline period, although it was slightly but significantly better in the pilot states during the follow-up period (absolute mortality difference at 1 year, 0.9%; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction has improved in the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project pilot states. Performance on the defined quality indicators appeared to be better in the pilot states than in the rest of the nation in 1995 and was associated with reduced mortality.

Quality improvement activity directed at the national level: examples from the Health Care Financing Administration.

Quality improvement projects coordinated by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) are currently underway to improve the care provided to Medicare beneficiaries. We describe five national quality improvement projects, the End Stage Renal Disease Core Indicators Project, the National Anemia Cooperative Project, the Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project, and the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project. We outline the types of intervention strategies employed and compare the approaches used for fee-for-service sites and for managed care plans.

Determinants of appropriate use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors after acute myocardial infarction in persons > or = 65 years of age.

We sought to determine how often angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are prescribed as a discharge medication among eligible patients > or = 65 years old with an acute myocardial infarction; to identify patient characteristics associated with the decision to prescribe ACE inhibitors; and to determine the factors associated with the decision to obtain an evaluation of left ventricular function among patients who have no contraindications to ACE inhibitors. We addressed these aims with an observational study of consecutive elderly Medicare beneficiary survivors of an acute myocardial infarction hospitalized in Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, and Wisconsin between June 1992 and February 1993. Among the 5,453 patients without a contraindication to ACE inhibitors at discharge, 3,528 (65%) had an evaluation of left ventricular function. Of the 1,228 patients without a contraindication to ACE inhibitors who had a left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 40%, 548 (45%) were prescribed the medication at discharge. In a multivariable analysis, an increased prescribed use of ACE inhibitors at discharge was correlated with several factors, including diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, ventricular tachycardia, and loop diuretics as a discharge medication. Patients admitted after the publication of the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) trial were significantly more likely to receive ACE inhibitors, although the absolute improvement in utilization was small in the 6 months after the trial results were published. In conclusion, improving the identification of appropriate patients for ACE inhibitors and increasing the prescription of ACE inhibitors for ideal patients may provide an excellent opportunity to improve care.

Medicare analysis and use of outcome-based data.

Activities of the Health Care Financing Administration in evaluating quality/performance of care in five major areas of medical services are reviewed. The goal in all areas is to improve rather than police performance. Specific attention is given to Health Care Financing Administration projects in myocardial infarction and nursing-home care. Future prospects are discussed for continued focus on institutions and systems, Health Care Financing Administration payment practices, increased focus on risk-adjusted outcomes, and publication of data.

Aspirin for secondary prevention after acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: prescribed use and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To determine how often aspirin was prescribed as a discharge medication to eligible patients 65 years of age and older who were hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction; to identify patient characteristics associated with the decision to use aspirin; and to evaluate the association between prescription of aspirin at discharge and 6-month survival. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: All 352 nongovernment, acute care hospitals in Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, and Wisconsin. PATIENTS: 5490 consecutive Medicare beneficiaries who survived an acute myocardial infarction, were hospitalized between June 1992 and February 1993, and did not have a contraindication to aspirin. MEASUREMENTS: Medical charts were reviewed to obtain information on the prescription of aspirin at discharge, contraindications, patient demographic characteristics, and clinical factors. RESULTS: 4149 patients (76%) were prescribed aspirin at hospital discharge. In a multivariable analysis, an increased prescribed use of aspirin at discharge was correlated with several indicators of better overall health status (better left ventricular ejection fraction, absence of diabetes, shorter length of hospital stay, higher albumin level, and discharge to the patient's home). The prescribed use of aspirin at discharge was also associated with several specific patterns of care, including the use of cardiac procedures, beta-blocker therapy at discharge, and aspirin during the hospitalization. The prescribed use of aspirin at discharge was associated with a lower mortality rate 6 months after discharge compared with no prescribed aspirin (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.98), even after adjustment for baseline differences in demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin was not prescribed at discharge to 24% of elderly patients who were hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction and did not have a contraindication to aspirin. Several patient characteristics were associated with a higher risk for not being prescribed aspirin. Increasing the prescription of aspirin for these patients may provide an excellent opportunity to improve their care.

Aspirin in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction in elderly Medicare beneficiaries. Patterns of use and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Although aspirin is an effective, inexpensive, and safe treatment of acute myocardial infarction, the frequency of use of aspirin in actual medical practice is not known. Elderly patients, a group with low rates of utilization of effective therapies such as thrombolytic therapy, also may be at risk of not receiving aspirin for acute myocardial infarction. To address this issue, we sought to determine the current pattern of aspirin use and to assess its effectiveness in a large, population-based sample of elderly patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction. METHODS AND RESULTS: As part of the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project Pilot, a Health Care Financing Administration initiative to improve quality of care for Medicare beneficiaries, we abstracted hospital medical records of Medicare beneficiaries who were hospitalized in Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, or Wisconsin from June 1992 through February 1993. Among the 10,018 patients > or = 65 years old who had no absolute contraindications to aspirin, 6140 patients (61%) received aspirin within the first 2 days of hospitalization. Patients who were older, had more comorbidity, presented without chest pain, and had high-risk characteristics such as heart failure and shock were less likely to receive aspirin. The use of aspirin was significantly associated with a lower mortality (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89) after adjustment for potential confounders. CONCLUSIONS: About one third of elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction who had no contraindications to aspirin therapy did not receive it within the first 2 days of hospitalization. The elderly patients with the highest risk of death were the least likely to receive aspirin. After adjustment for differences between the treatment groups, the use of aspirin was associated with 22% lower odds of 30-day mortality. The increased use of aspirin for patients with acute myocardial infarction is an excellent opportunity to improve the delivery of care to elderly patients.

Quality of care for Medicare patients with acute myocardial infarction. A four-state pilot study from the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and test indicators of the quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review. SETTING: All acute care hospitals in Alabama, Connecticut, Iowa, and Wisconsin. PATIENTS: All hospitalizations for Medicare patients discharged with a principal diagnosis of AMI between June 1, 1992, and February 28, 1993, were identified (N = 16,869). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Percentage of patients receiving appropriate interventions as defined by 11 quality-of-care indicators derived from clinical practice guidelines that were modified and updated in consultation with a national group of physicians and other health care professionals. RESULTS: We abstracted data from 16,124 (96%) of the hospitalizations, representing 14,108 primary hospitalizations and 2016 hospitalizations resulting from transfers. Potential exclusions to the use of standard treatments in AMI care were common with 90% and 70% of patients having potential exclusions for thrombolytics and beta-blockers, respectively. In cohorts of "ideal candidates" for specific interventions, 83% received aspirin, 69% received thrombolytics, and 70% received heparin during the initial hospitalization; 77% received aspirin and 45% received beta-blockers at discharge. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that many Medicare patients may not be ideal candidates for standard AMI therapies, but these treatments are underused, even in the absence of discernible contraindications. Hospitals and physicians who apply these quality indicators to their practices are likely to find opportunities for improvement.

Measuring quality of care under Medicare and Medicaid.

The Health Care Financing Administration's (HCFA) approach to measuring quality of care uses an accepted definition of quality, explicit domains of measurement, and a formal validation procedure that includes face validity, construct validity, reliability, clinical validation, and tests for usefulness. The indicators of quality for Medicare and Medicaid patients span the range of service types, medical conditions, and payment systems and rest on a variety of data systems. Some have already been incorporated into operational systems while others are scheduled for incorporation over the next 3 years.

HCFA's Health Care Quality Improvement Program and the Cooperative Cardiovascular Project.

The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) is changing the direction of its quality assessment and improvement program from one that tries to identify and cull "bad apples" to one that tries to improve the mainstream of care. This strategy change is known as the "Health Care Quality Improvement Program." An important aspect of this strategy change is to develop a partnership with providers that will ensure the provision of quality improvement information that is valid and useful to them. The Health Care Quality Improvement Program consists of both quality improvement projects and a series of quality indicators. The Medicare Quality Indicator System will develop a small number of indicators or appropriateness criteria for each major medical condition that affects Medicare beneficiaries. This national monitoring system has three primary goals: (1) to track trends in the quality of care over time and in variations in the quality of care across regions; (2) to provide the basis for making decisions on where it would be appropriate to carry out quality-of-care improvement projects; and (3) to support the execution of these projects. Quality improvement projects are cooperative efforts designed to improve a specific aspect of care. The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project is an early quality improvement project focusing initially on acute myocardial infarction; it will later focus on coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary artery angioplasty.

The use of Health Care Financing Administration data for the development of a quality improvement project on the treatment of anemia.

The Health Care Financing Administration maintains a wide array of data systems that are essential to the functioning of the Medicare program. These data, collected and maintained for the purposes of ensuring entitlements and payment for services, also can be used to monitor programmatic changes and to define potential problem areas. The end-stage renal disease (ESRD) Program Management and Medical Information System (PMMIS) is a subset of the larger Medicare statistical system. It is a historic record of all Medicare ESRD beneficiaries dating back to 1978. Basic Medicare enrollment information on ESRD beneficiaries is enhanced with the addition of information on the cause of renal failure, type of dialysis therapy, transplantation history, and cause of death. The ESRD PMMIS has been put to a number of uses in the past decade or so, ranging from basic descriptive epidemiology to analyses of mortality rates to assessments of programmatic issues such as the composite rate and dialyzer reuse. Because of the limited clinical detail in the PMMIS, there are many specific questions that cannot be adequately addressed. With approval of the Food and Drug Administration and Medicare coverage of erythropoietin, a erythropoietin monitoring system was developed to assess utilization trends of this anemia control drug. Within a few months it became evident that dosing levels for erythropoietin were much lower than expected from the clinical trials. Following a change in the payment method from a fixed amount to one based on dose level, dosing has increased markedly. However, hematocrit levels still remain below optimal levels. This lack of hematocrit response has led the Health Care Financing Administration, in concert with the renal community, to target anemia control as a potential health care quality improvement project. This paper presents an example of the type of data presentation that can be derived from the current PMMIS. The Health Standards and Quality Bureau has made a commitment to a program of continuous quality improvement. Part of this process is the provision of descriptive data that can be the starting point for an iterative approach to quality improvement.

The government's role in hospital accountability for quality of care.

BACKGROUND: The role of the U.S. government in the accountability of hospitals for quality of care involves shaping the community of those interested in quality, developing methods and infrastructure, standardizing information, providing information and technical assistance, and enforcing standards. The federal government's role in shaping an atmosphere of trust or distrust is critical but underestimated. The research and development of methods and infrastructure is widely acknowledged and many health systems' reform proposals emphasize it. Several state governments have begun standardizing and providing quality information, and this role is also assigned to the federal government in several reform proposals. Enforcing standards, including licensure and certification, is the most widely understood governmental role; states license whereas the federal government certifies compliance with Medicare conditions of participation either directly or through accreditation by the Joint Commission. These standards are evolving rapidly. Only recently has government taken on the role of providing technical assistance for quality improvement. ISSUES: Health system reform legislation may shape hospital accountability by (a) mandating uniform quality performance measurement and disclosure, (b) replacing emphasis on minimum standards with emphasis on improvement, (c) changing the structure of certification requirements, (d) requiring participation in quality improvement activities, and (e) funding new quality improvement structures. Some support a federal role in developing and implementing measures, but there is disagreement on the feasible pace, the uses of the resulting information, and the federal role in quality improvement. There is also disagreement about the future form of Medicare-based federal quality improvement efforts.