Defining Multiple Chronic Conditions for Quality Measurement.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) are a critical but undefined group for quality measurement. We present a generally applicable systematic approach to defining an MCC cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries that we developed for a national quality measure, risk-standardized rates of unplanned admissions for Accountable Care Organizations. RESEARCH DESIGN: To define the MCC cohort we: (1) identified potential chronic conditions; (2) set criteria for cohort conditions based on MCC framework and measure concept; (3) applied the criteria informed by empirical analysis, experts, and the public; (4) described "broader" and "narrower" cohorts; and (5) selected final cohort with stakeholder input. SUBJECTS: Subjects were patients with chronic conditions. Participants included 21.8 million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in 2012 aged 65 years and above with ≥1 of 27 Medicare Chronic Condition Warehouse condition(s). RESULTS: In total, 10 chronic conditions were identified based on our criteria; 8 of these 10 were associated with notably increased admission risk when co-occurring. A broader cohort (2+ of the 8 conditions) included 4.9 million beneficiaries (23% of total cohort) with an admission rate of 70 per 100 person-years. It captured 53% of total admissions. The narrower cohort (3+ conditions) had 2.2 million beneficiaries (10%) with 100 admissions per 100 person-years and captured 32% of admissions. Most stakeholders viewed the broader cohort as best aligned with the measure concept. CONCLUSIONS: By systematically narrowing chronic conditions to those most relevant to the outcome and incorporating stakeholder input, we defined an MCC admission measure cohort supported by stakeholders. This approach can be used as a model for other MCC outcome measures.

Risk-standardized Acute Admission Rates Among Patients With Diabetes and Heart Failure as a Measure of Quality of Accountable Care Organizations: Rationale, Methods, and Early Results.

BACKGROUND: Population-based measures of admissions among patients with chronic conditions are important quality indicators of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), yet there are challenges in developing measures that enable fair comparisons among providers. METHODS: On the basis of consensus standards for outcome measure development and with expert and stakeholder input on methods decisions, we developed and tested 2 models of risk-standardized acute admission rates (RSAARs) for patients with diabetes and heart failure using 2010-2012 Medicare claims data. Model performance was assessed with deviance R; score reliability was tested with intraclass correlation coefficient. We estimated RSAARs for 114 Shared Savings Program ACOs in 2012 and we assigned ACOs to 3 performance categories: no different, worse than, and better than the national rate. RESULTS: The diabetes and heart failure cohorts included 6.5 and 2.6 million Medicare Fee-For-Service beneficiaries aged 65 years and above, respectively. Risk-adjustment variables were age, comorbidities, and condition-specific severity variables, but not socioeconomic status or other contextual factors. We selected hierarchical negative binomial models with the outcome of acute, unplanned hospital admissions per 100 person-years. For the diabetes and heart failure measures, respectively, the models accounted for 22% and 12% of the deviance in outcomes and score reliability was 0.89 and 0.81. For the diabetes measure, 51 (44.7%) ACOs were no different, 45 (39.5%) were better, and 18 (15.8%) were worse than the national rate. The distribution of performance for the heart failure measure was 61 (53.5%), 37 (32.5%), and 16 (14.0%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Measures of RSAARs for patients with diabetes and heart failure meet criteria for scientific soundness and reveal important variation in quality across ACOs.

Fried meat intake is a risk factor for lung adenocarcinoma in a prospective cohort of Chinese men and women in Singapore.

Probable human carcinogens are generated during Chinese-style high-temperature cooking of meat and have been detected in the ambient air and on the meat surface. Although the inhalation of these compounds is an established risk factor for lung cancer, exposure via fried meat consumption has not yet been prospectively evaluated as a risk factor. The relationship between fried meat intake and lung cancer risk was investigated using data from a prospective cohort study among Chinese in Singapore. Lung cancer cases (n = 1130) were identified from 61 321 men and women, 70% of whom were lifetime never smokers. Proportional hazards regression methods were used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Overall, there was no association between fried meat intake and risk of all lung cancers combined. For lung adenocarcinoma, fried meat intake had a statistically significant association with increased risk. The association between fried meat intake and risk of lung adenocarcinoma became stronger when analyses were restricted to lifetime never smokers. Compared with the lowest tertile of fried meat intake, the HRs (95% CIs) for the second and third tertiles were 1.43 (0.98, 2.08) and 1.51 (1.03, 2.22), respectively (P for trend = 0.04). The positive association was present among both men and women. There was no association between fried meat intake and risk of non-adenocarcinomas of the lung. Our prospective results for fried meat intake support consumption as an important route of exposure to compounds from Chinese-style high-temperature cooking for the development of lung adenocarcinoma.

Green and black tea intake in relation to prostate cancer risk among Singapore Chinese.

PURPOSE: Tea is one of the most commonly consumed beverages worldwide. To date, observational data from prospective cohort studies investigating the relationship between green and black tea intake and prostate cancer risk are sparse and equivocal. In a population-based, prospective cohort study of Chinese men in Singapore, we investigated the relationship between green and black tea intake and prostate cancer risk. METHODS: Tea consumption data for 27,293 men were collected at baseline (between 1993 and 1998) using a validated food frequency questionnaire. After an average of 11.2 years of follow-up, 298 men had developed prostate cancer. Proportional hazards regression methods were used to assess the associations between tea intake and prostate cancer risk. RESULTS: There was no association between daily green tea intake and prostate cancer risk, compared with no green tea intake [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.08; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.79, 1.47]. For black tea, a statistically significant positive association and trend were observed for daily intake compared with no black tea intake (HR = 1.41, 95 % CI 1.03, 1.92; p for trend <0.01) CONCLUSIONS: Few prospective data are available from populations that have both a high level and wide range of black and green tea intake; this study represents a unique opportunity to evaluate their individual effects on prostate cancer risk. Our findings support the notion that green tea intake does not protect against prostate cancer and that black tea intake may increase prostate cancer risk.