Potentially More Out of Reach: Public Reporting Exacerbates Inequities in Home Health Access.

Policy Points Public reporting is associated with both mitigating and exacerbating inequities in high-quality home health agency use for marginalized groups. Ensuring equitable access to home health requires taking a closer look at potentially inequitable policies to ensure that these policies are not inadvertently exacerbating disparities as home health public reporting potentially does. Targeted federal, state, and local interventions should focus on raising awareness about the five-star quality ratings among marginalized populations for whom inequities have been exacerbated. CONTEXT: Literature suggests that public reporting of quality may have the unintended consequence of exacerbating disparities in access to high-quality, long-term care for older adults. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of the home health five-star ratings on changes in high-quality home health agency use by race, ethnicity, income status, and place-based factors. METHODS: We use data from the Outcome and Assessment Information Set, Medicare Enrollment Files, Care Compare, and American Community Survey to estimate differential access to high-quality home health agencies between July 2014 and June 2017. To estimate the impact of the home health five-star rating introduction on the use of high-quality home health agencies, we use a longitudinal observational pretest-posttest design. FINDINGS: After the introduction of the home health five-star ratings in 2016, we found that adjusted rates of high-quality home health agency use increased for all home health patients, except for Hispanic/Latine and Asian American/Pacific Islander patients. Additionally, we found that the disparity in high-quality home health agency use between low-income and higher-income home health patients was exacerbated after the introduction of the five-star quality ratings. We also observed that patients within predominantly Hispanic/Latine neighborhoods had a significant decrease in their use of high-quality home health agencies, whereas patients in predominantly White and integrated neighborhoods had a significant increase in high-quality home health agency use. Other neighborhoods experience a nonsignificant change in high-quality home health agency use. CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers should be aware of the potential unintended consequences for implementing home health public reporting, specifically for Hispanic/Latine, Asian American/Pacific Islander, and low-income home health patients, as well as patients residing in predominantly Hispanic/Latine neighborhoods. Targeted interventions should focus on raising awareness around the five-star ratings.

Spillover effect of the Patient Drive Payment Model on skilled nursing facility therapy delivery among Medicare Advantage enrollees.

In a multi-payer health care system, economic theory suggests that different payers can impose spillover effects on one another. This study aimed to evaluate the spillover effect of the Patient Driven Payment Model (PDPM) on Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees, despite it being designed for Traditional Medicare (TM) beneficiaries. We applied a regression discontinuity approach by comparing therapy utilization before and after the implementation of PDPM in October 2019 focusing on patients newly admitted to skilled nursing facilities. The results showed that both TM and MA enrollees experienced a decrease in individual therapy minutes and an increase in non-individual therapy minutes. The estimated reduction in total therapy use was 9 min per day for TM enrollees and 3 min per day for MA enrollees. The effect of PDPM on MA beneficiaries varied depending on the level of MA penetration, with the smallest effect in facilities with the highest MA penetration quartile. In summary, the PDPM had directionally similar effects on therapy utilization for both TM and MA enrollees, but the magnitudes were smaller for MA beneficiaries. These results suggest that policy changes intended for TM beneficiaries may spillover to MA enrollees and should be assessed accordingly.

Advanced practice clinician care and end-of-life outcomes for community- and nursing home-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries with dementia.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) often face burdensome end-of-life care transfers. Advanced practice clinicians (APCs)-which include nurse practitioners and physician assistants-increasingly provide primary care to this population. To fill current gaps in the literature, we measured the association between APC involvement in end-of-life care versus hospice utilization and hospitalization for older adults with ADRD. METHODS: Using Medicare data, we identified nursing home- (N=517,490) and community-dwelling (N=322,461) beneficiaries with ADRD who died between 2016 and 2018. We employed propensity score-weighted regression methods to examine the association between different levels of APC care during their final 9 months of life versus hospice utilization and hospitalization during their final month. RESULTS: For both nursing home- and community-dwelling beneficiaries, higher APC care involvement associated with lower hospitalization rates and higher hospice rates. DISCUSSION: APCs are an important group of providers delivering end-of-life primary care to individuals with ADRD. HIGHLIGHTS: For both nursing home- and community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries with ADRD, adjusted hospitalization rates were lower and hospice rates were higher for individuals with higher proportions of APC care involvement during their final 9 months of life. Associations between APC care involvement and both adjusted hospitalization rates and adjusted hospice rates persisted when accounting for primary care visit volume.

Memory care reduces nursing home admissions among assisted-living residents with dementia.

INTRODUCTION: We compare nursing-home and hospital admissions among residents with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) in memory-care assisted living to those in general assisted living. METHODS: Retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries with ADRD in large (>25 bed) assisted-living communities. We compared admission to a hospital, to a nursing home, and long-term (>90 day) admission to a nursing home between the two groups, using risk differences and survival analysis. RESULTS: Residents in memory-care assisted living had a lower adjusted risk of hospitalization (risk difference = -1.8 percentage points [P = .014], hazard ratio = 0.93 [0.87-1.00]), a lower risk of nursing-home admission (risk difference = -2.2 percentage points [P < .001], hazard ratio = 0.87 [-.79-0.95]), and a lower risk of a long-term nursing home admission (risk difference = -1.1 percentage points [P < .001], hazard ratio = 0.71 [0.57-0.88]). DISCUSSION: Memory care is associated with reduced rates of nursing-home placement, particularly long-term stays, compared to general assisted living.

Mandated Copayment Reductions in Medicare Advantage: Effects on Skilled Nursing Care, Hospitalizations, and Plan Exit.

OBJECTIVES: To address concerns that postacute cost-sharing may deter high-need beneficiaries from participating in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have capped cost-sharing for skilled nursing facility (SNF) services in MA plans since 2011. This study examines whether SNF use, inpatient use, and plan disenrollment changed following stricter regulations in 2015 that required most MA plans to eliminate or substantially reduce cost-sharing for SNF care. DESIGN: Difference-in-differences retrospective analysis from 2013 to 2016. SETTING: MA plans. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-one million MA members in 320 plans with mandatory cost-sharing reductions and 261 plans without such reductions. MEASUREMENTS: Mean monthly number of SNF admissions, SNF days, hospitalizations, and plan disenrollees per 1000 members. RESULTS: Mean total cost-sharing for the first 20 days of SNF services decreased from $911 to $104 in affected plans. Relative to concurrent changes in plans without mandated cost-sharing reductions, plans with mandatory cost-sharing reductions experienced no significant differences in the number of SNF days per 1000 members (adjusted between-group difference: 0.4 days per 1000 members [95% confidence interval (95% CI), -5.2 to 6.0, P=0.89], small decreases in the number of hospitalizations per 1000 members [adjusted between-group difference: 0.6 admissions per 1000 members (95% CI, -1.0 to -0.1; P=0.03)], and small decreases in the number of SNF users who disenrolled at year-end [adjusted between-group difference: -16.8 disenrollees per 1000 members (95% CI, -31.9 to -1.8; P=0.03)]. CONCLUSIONS: Mandated reductions in SNF cost-sharing may have curbed selective disenrollment from MA plans without significantly increasing use of SNF services.

Understanding the Relationship Between Nursing Home Experience With Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Patient Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: As the population with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) continues to age, the need for nursing home (NH) care is increasing. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether NH's experience in treating HIV is related to outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used claims and assessment data to identify individuals with and without HIV who were admitted to NHs in 9 high HIV prevalent states. We classified NHs into HIV experience categories and estimate the effects of NH HIV experience on patient's outcomes. We applied an instrumental variable using distances between each individual's residence and NHs with different HIV experience. SUBJECTS: In all, 5,929,376 admissions for those without HIV and 53,476 admissions for residents with HIV. MEASURES: Our primary outcomes were 30-day hospital readmissions, likelihood of becoming a long stay resident, and 180-day mortality posthospital discharge. RESULTS: Residents with HIV tended to have poorer outcomes than residents without HIV, regardless of the NH they were admitted to. Residents with HIV admitted to high HIV experience NHs were more likely to be readmitted to the hospital than those admitted to NHs with lower HIV experience (19.6% in 0% HIV NHs, 18.7% in 05% HIV NHs and 22.9% in 5%-50% HIV NHs). CONCLUSIONS: Residents with HIV experience worse outcomes in NHs than residents without HIV. Increased HIV experience was not related to improved outcomes.

Early Acceleration of COVID-19 in Areas with Larger Nursing Homes and Certificate of Need Laws.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreaks have become common in large nursing homes, placing not only residents but also staff and community members at risk for infection. However, the relationship between larger nursing homes and the community spread of SARS-CoV-2 has not yet been documented. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between county average nursing home bed size and presence of certificate of need (CON) laws, which influence nursing home size, with county-level SARS-CoV-2 prevalence over time. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using county-level data from March 11 through June 12, 2020. PARTICIPANTS: All US counties with at least one nursing home (n = 2,883). MAIN MEASURES: The main explanatory variables were county average nursing home bed size and presence of a CON law. The main outcome was the cumulative number of SARS-CoV-2 cases on each day of the study period adjusted for county population size and density, demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, total nursing home bed supply, other health care supply measures, epidemic stage, and census region. KEY RESULTS: By June 12, a between-county difference in average nursing home size equal to 1 bed was associated with 3.92 additional SARS-COV-2 cases (95% CI = 2.14 to 5.69; P < 0.001), on average, and counties subject to CON laws had 104.53 additional SARS-CoV-2 cases (95% CI = 7.68 to 201.38; P < 0.05), on average. Counties with larger nursing homes also demonstrated higher growth in the frequency of SARS-COV-2 throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: At the county level, average nursing home size and CON law presence was associated with a greater frequency of SARS-CoV-2 cases. Controlling the impact of the coronavirus 2019 pandemic may require additional resources for communities with larger nursing homes and more attention towards long-term care policies.

The Relationship Between Medicare Advantage Star Ratings and Enrollee Experience.

BACKGROUND: Medicare Advantage plans, private managed care plans that enrolled 34% of Medicare beneficiaries in 2019, received $6 billion in annual bonus payments on the basis of their performance on a 5-star rating system. Little is known, however, as to the extent these ratings adequately capture enrollee experience. OBJECTIVES: To measure the effect of exposure to higher rated Medicare Advantage contracts on enrollee experience. DESIGN: An instrumental variables analysis using MA contract consolidation as an exogenous shock to the quality of plan enrollees are exposed to. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 345,897 MA enrollees enrolled in non-consolidated contracts and 21,405 enrollees who were consolidated. MAIN MEASURES: The primary exposure was enrollee star rating, instrumented using contract consolidation. The primary outcomes were enrollee self-reported experience measures. KEY RESULTS: There were no significant effects on increased star ratings on 23 of 27 outcomes. A one-star increase in contract star rating leads to a 5.4 percentage point increase in reporting that pain does not interfere with daily activities (95%CI 2.4, 8.4), and a 4.4 percentage reduction in the likelihood that a physician would talk to the enrollee about physical activity (95%CI: -7.8, -1.1, all p<0.05). A one-star increase in contract star rating led to an 8.4 percentage point reduction in achieving the top score on the received needed information index (95%CI: -16.4, -0.4), and a 1.8 percentage point reduction in responding with the lowest score for the overall rating of care (95%CI: -3.5, -0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to a higher rated MA contract did not appreciably increase enrollee experience. Policymakers should consider reassessing how these ratings and associated bonus payments are currently calculated.

Rural-urban differences in diagnostic incidence and prevalence of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding rural-urban variation in the diagnostic incidence and prevalence of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) will inform policies to improve timely diagnosis and access to supportive services for older adults in rural communities. METHODS: Using 2008 to 2015 national claims data for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries (roughly 170 million person-years), we computed unadjusted and adjusted diagnostic incidence and prevalence estimates for ADRD in metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural counties, and examined differences in survival rates. RESULTS: Risk-adjusted ADRD diagnostic incidence was higher in rural versus metropolitan counties despite lower prevalence. Among beneficiaries diagnosed with ADRD in 2008, metropolitan county residents experienced longer survival compared to residents in rural and micropolitan counties. DISCUSSION: These data suggest that older adults in rural communities may be underdiagnosed with ADRD, and/or diagnosed at later stages of dementia. Further work is needed to develop strategies to reduce this disparity.

Hospital Readmission Rates in Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare: A Retrospective Population-Based Analysis.

Background: Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program reports risk-standardized readmission rates for traditional Medicare but not Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Objective: To compare readmission rates between Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare. Design: Retrospective cohort study linking the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MedPAR) file with the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS). Setting: 4748 U.S. acute care hospitals. Patients: Patients aged 65 years or older hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (n = 841 613), congestive heart failure (CHF) (n = 1 458 652), or pneumonia (n = 2 020 365) between 2011 and 2014. Measurements: 30-day readmissions. Results: Among admissions for AMI, CHF, and pneumonia identified in MedPAR, 29.2%, 38.0%, and 37.2%, respectively, did not have a corresponding record in HEDIS. Of these, 18.9% for AMI, 23.7% for CHF, and 18.3% for pneumonia resulted in a readmission that was identified in MedPAR. However, among index admissions appearing in HEDIS, 14.4% for AMI, 18.4% for CHF, and 13.9% for pneumonia resulted in a readmission. Patients in Medicare Advantage had lower unadjusted readmission rates than those in traditional Medicare for all 3 conditions (16.6% vs. 17.1% for AMI, 21.4% vs. 21.7% for CHF, and 16.3% vs. 16.4% for pneumonia). However, after standardization, patients in Medicare Advantage had higher readmission rates than patients in traditional Medicare for AMI (17.2% vs. 16.9%; difference, 0.3 percentage point [95% CI, 0.1 to 0.5 percentage point]), CHF (21.7% vs. 21.4%; difference, 0.3 percentage point [CI, 0.2 to 0.5 percentage point]), and pneumonia (16.5% vs. 16.0%; difference, 0.5 percentage point [95% CI, 0.4 to 0.6 percentage point]). Rate differences increased between 2011 and 2014. Limitation: Potential unobserved differences between populations. Conclusion: The HEDIS data underreported hospital admissions for 3 common medical conditions, and readmission rates were higher among patients with underreported admissions. Medicare Advantage beneficiaries had higher risk-adjusted 30-day readmission rates than traditional Medicare beneficiaries. Primary Funding Source: National Institute on Aging.

Association of Diagnosis Coding With Differences in Risk-Adjusted Short-term Mortality Between Critical Access and Non-Critical Access Hospitals.

Importance: Critical access hospitals (CAHs) provide care to rural communities. Increasing mortality rates have been reported for CAHs relative to non-CAHs. Because Medicare reimburses CAHs at cost, CAHs may report fewer diagnoses than non-CAHs, which may affect risk-adjusted comparisons of outcomes. Objective: To assess serial differences in risk-adjusted mortality rates between CAHs and non-CAHs after accounting for differences in diagnosis coding. Design, Setting, and Participants: Serial cross-sectional study of rural Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries admitted to US CAHs and non-CAHs for pneumonia, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, arrhythmia, urinary tract infection, septicemia, and stroke from 2007 to 2017. The final date of follow-up was December 31, 2017. Exposure: Admission to a CAH vs non-CAH. Main Outcomes and Measures: Discharge diagnosis count including trends from 2010 to 2011 when Medicare expanded the allowable number of billing codes for hospitalizations, and combined in-hospital and 30-day postdischarge mortality adjusted for demographics, primary diagnosis, preexisting conditions, and with vs without further adjustment for Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) score to understand the contribution of in-hospital secondary diagnoses. Results: There were 4 094 720 hospitalizations (17% CAH) for 2 850 194 unique Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 76.3 [11.7] years; 55.5% women). Patients in CAHs were older (median age, 80.1 vs 76.8 years) and more likely to be female (58% vs 55%). In 2010, the adjusted mean discharge diagnosis count was 7.52 for CAHs vs 8.53 for non-CAHs (difference, -0.99 [95% CI, -1.08 to -0.90]; P < .001). In 2011, the CAH vs non-CAH difference in diagnoses coded increased (P < .001 for interaction between CAH and year) to 9.27 vs 12.23 (difference, -2.96 [95% CI, -3.19 to -2.73]; P < .001). Adjusted mortality rates from the model with HCC were 13.52% for CAHs vs 11.44% for non-CAHs (percentage point difference, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.74 to 2.42]; P < .001) in 2007 and increased to 15.97% vs 12.46% (difference, 3.52 [95% CI, 3.09 to 3.94]; P < .001) in 2017 (P < .001 for interaction). Adjusted mortality rates from the model without HCC were not significantly different between CAHs and non-CAHs in all years except 2007 (12.19% vs 11.74%; difference, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.79]; P = .008) and 2010 (12.71% vs 12.28%; difference, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.77]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: For rural Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized from 2007 to 2017, CAHs submitted significantly fewer hospital diagnosis codes than non-CAHs, and short-term mortality rates adjusted for preexisting conditions but not in-hospital comorbidity measures were not significantly different by hospital type in most years. The findings suggest that short-term mortality outcomes at CAHs may not differ from those of non-CAHs after accounting for different coding practices for in-hospital comorbidities.

A Retrospective Study of Administrative Data to Identify High-Need Medicare Beneficiaries at Risk of Dying and Being Hospitalized.

BACKGROUND: Developing a definition of what constitutes high need among Medicare beneficiaries using administrative data is an important prerequisite to evaluating value-based payment reforms. While various definitions of high need exist, their predictive validity for different patient outcomes in the following year has not been systematically assessed for both fee-for-service (FFS) and Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To develop a definition of high need using administrative data in 2014 and to examine its predictive validity for patient outcomes in 2015 as compared to alternative definitions for both FFS and MA beneficiaries. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of national Medicare claims and post-acute assessment data. PARTICIPANTS: All Medicare beneficiaries in 2014 who survived until the end of the year (n = 54,717,039). MAIN MEASURES: Two or more complex conditions, 6 or more chronic conditions, acute or post-acute health services utilization, indicators of frailty, complete dependency in mobility or in any activities of daily living in post-acute care assessments, hospitalization, mortality, days in community, Medicare expenditures. KEY RESULTS: Based on our definition of high-need patients, 13.17% of FFS and 8.85% of MA beneficiaries were identified as high need in 2014. High-need FFS patients had mortality rates 7.1 times higher (16.23% vs. 2.27%) and hospitalization rates 3.4 times higher (40.69 vs. 12.03) in 2015 compared to other beneficiaries. Competing high-need definitions all had good specificity (≥ 0.88). Having 3 or more Hierarchical Chronic Conditions yielded a good positive predictive value for hospitalization, at 0.50, but only identified 19.71% of FFS beneficiaries hospitalized and 28.46% of FFS decedents that year as high need, as opposed to 33.92% and 51.98% for the new definition. Results were similar for MA beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed high-need definition has better sensitivity and yields a sample of almost 5 million FFS and 1.5 million MA beneficiaries, facilitating outcome performance comparisons across health systems.

Preventive healthcare-seeking behavior among poor older adults in Mexico: the impact of Seguro Popular, 2000-2012.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the effect of Seguro Popular (SP) on preventive care utilization among low-income SP beneficiaries and uninsured elders in Mexico. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fixed-effects instrumental-variable (FE-IV) pseudo-panel estimation from three rounds of the Mexican National Health and Nutrition Survey (2000, 2006 and 2012). RESULTS: Our findings suggest that SP has no significant effect on the use of preventive services, including screening for diabetes, hypertension, breast cancer and cervical cancer, by adults aged 50 to 75 years. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the evidence that suggests that SP has increased access to health insurance for the poor, inequalities in healthcare access and utilization still exist in Mexico. The Mexican government must keep working on extending health insurance coverage to vulnerable adults. Additional efforts to increase health care coverage and to support preventive care are needed to reduce persistent disparities in healthcare utilization.

OBJETIVO: Determinar el efecto del Seguro Popular (SP) en la utilización de la atención preventiva entre beneficiarios de SP de bajos ingresos y ancianos sin seguro en México. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estimación de pseudopanel de variables instrumentales de efectos fijos (FE-IV) en tres rondas de la Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutrición de México (2000, 2006 y 2012). RESULTADOS: El SP no tiene un efecto significativo en el uso de los servicios preventivos, incluida la detección de diabetes, hipertensión, cáncer de mama y cáncer de cuello uterino en adultos de 50 años o más. CONCLUSIONES: Aún existen desigualdades en el acceso a la asistencia médica en México. El gobierno mexicano debe seguir trabajando para extender la cobertura del seguro de salud a la población más vulnerable. Se necesitan esfuerzos adicionales para aumentar la cobertura de atención médica y apoyar la atención preventiva para reducir las disparidades persistentes.

Comparing post-acute rehabilitation use, length of stay, and outcomes experienced by Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with hip fracture in the United States: A secondary analysis of administrative data.

BACKGROUND: Medicare Advantage (MA) and Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) plans have different financial incentives. Medicare pays predetermined rates per beneficiary to MA plans for providing care throughout the year, while providers serving FFS patients are reimbursed per utilization event. It is unknown how these incentives affect post-acute care in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). The objective of this study was to examine differences in rehabilitation service use, length of stay, and outcomes for patients following hip fracture between FFS and MA enrollees. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a retrospective cohort study to examine differences in health service utilization and outcomes between FFS and MA patients in SNFs following hip fracture hospitalization during the period January 1, 2011, to June 30, 2015, and followed up until December 31, 2015. We linked the Master Beneficiary Summary File, Medicare Provider and Analysis Review data, Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set data, the Minimum Data Set, and the American Community Survey. The 6 primary outcomes of interest in this study included 2 process measures and 4 patient-centered outcomes. Process measures included length of stay in the SNF and average rehabilitation therapy minutes (physical and occupational therapy) received per day. Patient-centered outcomes included 30-day hospital readmission, changes in functional status as measured by the 28-point late loss MDS-ADL scale, likelihood of becoming a long-term resident, and successful discharge to the community. Successful discharge from a SNF was defined as being discharged to the community within 100 days of SNF admission and remaining alive in the community without being institutionalized in any acute or post-acute setting for at least 30 days. We analyzed 211,296 FFS and 75,554 MA patients with hip fracture admitted directly to a SNF following an index hospitalization who had not been in a nursing facility or hospital in the preceding year. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and nursing facility fixed effects regression models to compare treatments and outcomes between MA and FFS patients. MA patients were younger and less cognitively impaired upon SNF admission than FFS patients. After applying IPTW, demographic and clinical characteristics of MA patients were comparable with those of FFS patients. After adjusting for risk factors using IPTW-weighted fixed effects regression models, MA patients spent 5.1 (95% CI -5.4 to -4.8) fewer days in the SNF and received 463 (95% CI to -483.2 to -442.4) fewer minutes of total rehabilitation therapy during the first 40 days following SNF admission, i.e., 12.1 (95% CI -12.7 to -11.4) fewer minutes of rehabilitation therapy per day compared to FFS patients. In addition, MA patients had a 1.2 percentage point (95% CI -1.5 to -1.1) lower 30-day readmission rate, 0.6 percentage point (95% CI -0.8 to -0.3) lower rate of becoming a long-stay resident, and a 3.2 percentage point (95% CI 2.7 to 3.7) higher rate of successful discharge to the community compared to FFS patients. The major limitation of this study was that we only adjusted for observed differences to address selection bias between FFS and MA patients with hip fracture. Therefore, results may not be generalizable to other conditions requiring extensive rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to FFS patients, MA patients had a shorter course of rehabilitation but were more likely to be discharged to the community successfully and were less likely to experience a 30-day hospital readmission. Longer lengths of stay may not translate into better outcomes in the case of hip fracture patients in SNFs.

Informing Medicare's Two-Midnight Rule Policy With an Analysis of Hospital-Based Long Observation Stays.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Outpatient observation stays are increasingly substituting for standard inpatient hospitalizations. In 2013, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services adopted the controversial Two-Midnight Rule policy to curb long observation stays and better define the use of hospital-based observation services versus inpatient hospitalizations. We seek to determine the extent to which Medicare beneficiaries exposed to long observation stays (>48 hours) are clinically similar to those with short observation stays (≤48 hours) because this has relevance to the Two-Midnight Rule. METHODS: Using 100% Medicare claims data from 2008 to 2010, we identified all patients with long observation stays (>48 hours) who were admitted through the emergency department (ED). We report beneficiary characteristics, as well as crude and risk-adjusted 30-day rates of mortality, readmissions, and return ED visits stratified by observation stay length. RESULTS: Seven percent of 2.8 million observation stays were greater than 48 hours. Beneficiaries with long observation stays tended to be older, women, nonwhite, and urban residents, with a greater number of comorbid conditions. Crude rates increased with observation stay length for all 3 outcomes. However, after directly standardizing the rates, we observed the reverse trend because all adjusted rates decreased stepwise with observation stay length greater than 48 hours in a dose-response pattern. CONCLUSION: Patients with observation stays lasting longer than 48 hours are a clinically distinct population. Our findings support the conceptual underpinnings of the Two-Midnight Rule, but suggest that observation versus inpatient determinations should be based on actual length of stay rather than prospective prediction to reduce the administrative ambiguity this policy has created.

Preferred Provider Relationships Between Medicare Advantage Plans and Skilled Nursing Facilities Reduce Switching Out of Plans: An Observational Analysis.

Unlike traditional Medicare, Medicare Advantage (MA) plans contract with specific skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). Patients treated in an MA plan's preferred SNF may benefit from enhanced coordination and have a lower likelihood of switching out of their plan. Using 2011-2014 Medicare enrollment data, the Medicare Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set, and the Minimum Data Set, we examined Medicare enrollees who were newly admitted to SNFs in 2012-2013. We used the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services star rating to distinguish between MA plans and show how SNF concentration experienced by patients varies between patients in plans with different star ratings. We found that highly rated MA plans steer their patients to a smaller number of SNFs, and these patients are less likely to switch out of their plans. Strengthening the MA plan-SNF relationship may lower disenrollment rates for SNF beneficiaries, imparting benefits to both patients and payers.

First-dollar cost-sharing for skilled nursing facility care in medicare advantage plans.

BACKGROUND: The initial days of a Medicare-covered skilled nursing facility (SNF) stay may have no cost-sharing or daily copayments depending on beneficiaries' enrollment in traditional Medicare or Medicare Advantage. Some policymakers have advocated imposing first-dollar cost-sharing to reduce post-acute expenditures. We examined the relationship between first-dollar cost-sharing for a SNF stay and use of inpatient and SNF services. METHODS: We identified seven Medicare Advantage plans that introduced daily SNF copayments of $25-$150 in 2009 or 2010. Copays began on the first day of a SNF admission. We matched these plans to seven matched control plans that did not introduce first-dollar cost-sharing. In a difference-in-differences analysis, we compared changes in SNF and inpatient utilization for the 172,958 members of intervention and control plans. RESULTS: In intervention plans the mean annual number of SNF days per 100 continuously enrolled inpatients decreased from 768.3 to 750.6 days when cost-sharing changes took effect. Control plans experienced a concurrent increase: 721.7 to 808.1 SNF days per 100 inpatients (adjusted difference-in-differences: -87.0 days [95% CI (-112.1,-61.9)]). In intervention plans, we observed no significant changes in the probability of any SNF service use or the number of inpatient days per hospitalized member relative to concurrent trends among control plans. CONCLUSIONS: Among several strategies Medicare Advantage plans can employ to moderate SNF use, first-dollar SNF cost-sharing may be one influential factor. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.