Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Seattle Cancer Care Alliance; Cambia Health Solutions, Seattle; MultiCare Regional Cancer Center, Tacoma; and Premera Blue Cross, Mountlake Terrace, WA.
J Oncol Pract. 2018 Mar;14(3):e176-e185. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2017.028191. Epub 2018 Feb 8.
As new quality metrics and interventions for potentially preventable emergency department (ED) visits are implemented, we sought to compare methods for evaluating the prevalence and costs of potentially preventable ED visits that were related to cancer and chronic disease among a commercially insured oncology population in the year after treatment initiation.
We linked SEER records in western Washington from 2011 to 2016 with claims from two commercial insurers. The study included patients who were diagnosed with a solid tumor and tracked ED utilization for 1 year after the start of chemotherapy or radiation. Cancer symptoms from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services metric and a patient-reported outcome intervention were labeled potentially preventable (PpCancer). Prevention Quality Indicators of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality were labeled potentially preventable-chronic disease (PpChronic). We reported the primary diagnosis, all diagnosis field coding (1 to 10), and 2016 adjusted reimbursements.
Of 5,853 eligible patients, 27% had at least one ED visit, which yielded 2,400 total visits. Using primary diagnosis coding, 49.8% of ED visits had a PpCancer diagnosis, whereas 3.2% had a PpChronic diagnosis. Considering all diagnosis fields, 45.0%, 9.4%, and 18.5% included a PpCancer only, a PpChronic only, and both a PpCancer and a PpChronic diagnosis, respectively. The median reimbursement per visit was $735 (interquartile ratio, $194 to $1,549).
The prevalence of potentially preventable ED visits was generally high, but varied depending on the diagnosis code fields and the group of codes considered. Future research is needed to understand the complex landscape of potentially preventable ED visits and measures to improve value in cancer care delivery.
随着新的质量指标和针对潜在可预防急诊部(ED)就诊的干预措施的实施,我们试图比较在癌症治疗开始后一年内,在商业保险肿瘤患者人群中评估与癌症和慢性病相关的潜在可预防 ED 就诊的流行率和成本的方法,这些方法与癌症和慢性病有关。
我们将 2011 年至 2016 年华盛顿西部的 SEER 记录与两家商业保险公司的索赔记录相链接。该研究包括被诊断患有实体瘤并在化疗或放疗开始后 1 年内跟踪 ED 利用率的患者。医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心指标和患者报告的结果干预措施所标记的癌症症状被标记为潜在可预防(PpCancer)。医疗保健研究与质量局的预防质量指标被标记为潜在可预防的慢性病(PpChronic)。我们报告了主要诊断、所有诊断字段编码(1 至 10)和 2016 年调整后的报销情况。
在 5853 名符合条件的患者中,有 27%至少有一次 ED 就诊,共发生 2400 次就诊。使用主要诊断编码,49.8%的 ED 就诊有 PpCancer 诊断,而 3.2%有 PpChronic 诊断。考虑到所有诊断字段,分别有 45.0%、9.4%和 18.5%的就诊包括仅 PpCancer、仅 PpChronic 和 PpCancer 和 PpChronic 两者均有诊断。每次就诊的中位数报销额为 735 美元(四分位间距,194 美元至 1549 美元)。
潜在可预防 ED 就诊的流行率通常较高,但因诊断编码字段和所考虑的编码组而异。未来的研究需要了解潜在可预防 ED 就诊的复杂情况以及提高癌症护理提供价值的措施。