Publications by Year: 2019

IMPORTANCE: Hospitals that serve poorer populations have higher readmission rates. It is unknown whether these hospitals effectively lowered readmission rates in response to the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP).

OBJECTIVE: To compare pre-post differences in readmission rates among hospitals with different proportion of dual-eligible patients both generally and among the most highly penalized (ie, low performing) hospitals.

DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using piecewise linear model with estimated hospital-level risk-standardized readmission rates (RSRRs) as the dependent variable and a change point at HRRP passage (2010). Economic burden was assessed by proportion of dual-eligibles served.

SETTING: Acute care hospitals within the United States.

PARTICIPANTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older discharged alive from January 1, 2003 to November 30, 2014 with a principal discharge diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), congestive heart failure (CHF), and pneumonia.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Decrease in hospital-level RSRRs in the post-law period, after controlling for the pre-law trend.

RESULTS: For AMI, the pre-post difference between hospitals that service high and low proportion of dual-eligibles was not significant (-65 vs. -64 risk-standardized readmissions per 10000 discharges per year, P=0.0678). For CHF, RSRRs declined more at high than low dual-eligible hospitals (-79 vs. -75 risk-standardized readmissions per 10000 discharges per year, P=0.0006). For pneumonia, RSRRs declined less at high than low dual-eligible hospitals (-44 vs. -47 risk-standardized readmissions per 10000 discharges per year, P=0.0003). Among the 742 highest penalized hospitals and all conditions, the pre-post decline in rate of change of RSRRs was less for high dual-eligible hospitals than low dual-eligible hospitals (-68 vs. -74 risk-standardized readmissions per 10000 discharges per year for AMI, -88 vs. -97 for CHF, and -47 vs. -56 for pneumonia, P<0.0001 for all).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For all hospitals, differences in pre-post trends in RSRRs varied with disease conditions. However, for the highest-penalized hospitals, the pre-post decline in RSRRs was greater for low than high dual-eligible hospitals for all penalized conditions. These results suggest that high penalty, high dual-eligible hospitals may be less able to improve performance on readmission metrics.

IMPORTANCE: The addition of a claims-based frailty metric to traditional comorbidity-based risk-adjustment models for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), and pneumonia improves the prediction of 30-day mortality and readmission. This may have important implications for hospitals that tend to care for frail populations and participate in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services value-based payment programs, which use these risk-adjusted metrics to determine reimbursement.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the addition of frailty measures to traditional comorbidity-based risk-adjustment models improved prediction of outcomes for patients with AMI, HF, and pneumonia.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A nationwide cohort study included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries 65 years and older in the United States between January 1 and December 1, 2016. Analysis began August 2018.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Rates of mortality within 30 days of admission and 30 days of discharge, as well as 30-day readmission rates by frailty group. We evaluated the incremental effect of adding the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) to current comorbidity-based risk-adjustment models for 30-day outcomes across all conditions.

RESULTS: For 785 127 participants, there were 166 200 hospitalizations [21.2%] for AMI, 348 619 [44.4%] for HF, and 270 308 [34.4%] for pneumonia. The mean (SD) age at the time of hospitalization was 79.2 (8.9) years; 656 315 (83.6%) were white and 402 639 (51.3%) were women. The mean (SD) HFRS was 7.3 (7.4) for patients with AMI, 10.8 (8.3) for patients with HF, and 8.2 (5.7) for patients with pneumonia. Among patients hospitalized for AMI, an HFRS more than 15 (compared with an HFRS <5) was associated with a higher risk of 30-day postadmission mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.6; 95% CI, 3.4-3.8), 30-day postdischarge mortality (aOR, 4.0; 95% CI, 3.7-4.3), and 30-day readmission (aOR, 3.0; 95% CI, 2.9-3.1) after multivariable adjustment for age, sex, race, and comorbidities. Similar patterns were observed for patients hospitalized with HF (30-day postadmission mortality: aOR, 3.5; 95% CI, 3.4-3.7; 30-day postdischarge mortality: aOR, 3.5; 95% CI, 3.3-3.6; and 30-day readmission: aOR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.8-3.0) and among patients with pneumonia (30-day postadmission mortality: aOR, 2.5; 95% CI, 2.3-2.6; 30-day postdischarge mortality: aOR, 3.0; 95% CI, 2.9-3.2; and 30-day readmission: aOR, 2.8; 95% CI, 2.7-2.9). The addition of HFRS to traditional comorbidity-based risk-prediction models improved discrimination to predict outcomes for all 3 conditions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, frailty as measured by the HFRS was associated with mortality and readmissions among patients hospitalized for AMI, HF, or pneumonia. The addition of HFRS to traditional comorbidity-based risk-prediction models improved the prediction of outcomes for all 3 conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To determine any changes in total hospital revisits within 30 days of discharge after a hospital stay for medical conditions targeted by the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP).

DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING: Hospital stays among Medicare patients for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia between 1 January 2012 and 1 October 2015.

PARTICIPANTS: Medicare fee-for-service patients aged 65 or over.

MAIN OUTCOMES: Total hospital revisits within 30 days of discharge after hospital stays for medical conditions targeted by the HRRP, and by type of revisit: treat-and-discharge visit to an emergency department, observation stay (not leading to inpatient readmission), and inpatient readmission. Patient subgroups (age, sex, race) were also evaluated for each type of revisit.

RESULTS: Our study cohort included 3 038 740 total index hospital stays from January 2012 to September 2015: 1 357 620 for heart failure, 634 795 for acute myocardial infarction, and 1 046 325 for pneumonia. Counting all revisits after discharge, the total number of hospital revisits per 100 patient discharges for target conditions increased across the study period (monthly increase 0.023 visits per 100 patient discharges (95% confidence interval 0.010 to 0.035)). This change was due to monthly increases in treat-and-discharge visits to an emergency department (0.023 (0.015 to 0.032) and observation stays (0.022 (0.020 to 0.025)), which were only partly offset by declines in readmissions (-0.023 (-0.035 to -0.012)). Increases in observation stay use were more pronounced among non-white patients than white patients. No significant change was seen in mortality within 30 days of discharge for target conditions (-0.0034 (-0.012 to 0.0054)).

CONCLUSIONS: In the United States, total hospital revisits within 30 days of discharge for conditions targeted by the HRRP increased across the study period. This increase was due to a rise in post-discharge emergency department visits and observation stays, which exceeded the decline in readmissions. Although reductions in readmissions have been attributed to improvements in discharge planning and care transitions, our findings suggest that these declines could instead be because hospitals and clinicians have intensified efforts to treat patients who return to a hospital within 30 days of discharge in emergency departments and as observation stays.

The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) was established by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in 2010 with a goal of reducing preventable hospitalizations by imposing financial penalties on hospitals with higher-than-expected 30-day readmission rates. After the program was created, readmission rates appeared to decrease nationwide for patients hospitalized with heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, and pneumonia, the three conditions it originally targeted.

Since the implementation of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), readmissions have declined for Medicare patients with conditions targeted by the policy (acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia). To understand whether HRRP implementation was associated with a readmission decline for patients across all insurance types (Medicare, Medicaid, and private), we conducted a difference-in-differences analysis using information from the Nationwide Readmissions Database. We compared how quarterly readmissions for target conditions changed before (2010-12) and after (2012-14) HRRP implementation, using nontarget conditions as the control. Our results demonstrate that readmissions declined at a significantly faster rate after HRRP implementation not just for Medicare patients but also for those with Medicaid, both in the aggregate and for individual target conditions. However, composite Medicaid readmission rates remained higher than those for Medicare. Throughout the study period privately insured patients had the lowest aggregate readmission rates, which declined at a similar rate compared to nontarget conditions. The HRRP was associated with nationwide readmission reductions beyond the Medicare patients originally targeted by the policy. Further research is needed to understand the specific mechanisms by which hospitals have achieved reductions in readmissions.

IMPORTANCE: Lack of insurance is associated with worse care and outcomes among adults hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). It is unclear whether states' decision to expand Medicaid eligibility under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2014 were associated with improved quality of care and outcomes among low-income patients hospitalized with AMI.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether rates of uninsurance, quality of care, and outcomes changed among patients hospitalized for AMI 3 years after states elected to expand Medicaid compared with nonexpansion states.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study completed at hospitals participating in National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry. Participants were patients younger than 65 years hospitalized for AMI from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2016.

EXPOSURES: State Medicaid expansion in 2014.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Rates of uninsured and Medicaid-insured hospitalizations for AMI in states that expanded Medicaid vs those that did not. Comparison of in-hospital care quality, procedure use, and mortality between expansion and nonexpansion states for the years prior to and after Medicaid expansion. Hierarchical logistic regressions models were used to assess the association between Medicaid expansion and outcomes.

RESULTS: The initial cohort included 325 343 patients. Uninsured AMI hospitalizations declined in expansion states (18.0% [4395 of 24 358 hospitalizations] to 8.4% [2638 of 31 382 hospitalizations]) and more modestly in nonexpansion states (25.6% [7963 of 31 137 hospitalizations] to 21.1% [8668 of 41 120 hospitalizations]) from 2012 to 2016 (P < .001 difference in trend expansion vs nonexpansion). Medicaid coverage increased from 7.5% (1818 of 24 358 hospitalizations) to 14.4% (4502 of 31 382 hospitalizations) in expansion states and 6.2% (1924 of 31 137 hospitalizations) to 6.6% (2717 of 41 120 hospitalizations) in nonexpansion states (P < .001). The low-income cohort included 55 737 patients across 765 sites. In expansion states, low-income adults' odds of receipt of defect-free care increased (76.3% to 75.9%, adjusted odds ratio 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02-1.21) but to a lesser degree than in nonexpansion states (72.8% to 74.5%, adjusted odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.30-1.47; P for interaction < .001). There was no change in use of most procedures (ie, percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) in expansion compared with nonexpansion states. Improvement in in-hospital mortality was similar between expansion and nonexpansion states (3.2% to 2.8%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.77-1.12 vs 3.3% to 3.0%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99; P for interaction = .48).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Medicaid expansion was associated with a significant reduction in rates of uninsurance among patients hospitalized with AMI. Quality of care and outcomes did not improve among low-income adults in expansion compared with nonexpansion states. Hospital care for AMI may be less sensitive to insurance than has been recognized in the past.