Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Division of Palliative Care and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022 Feb;70(2):522-530. doi: 10.1111/jgs.17517. Epub 2021 Oct 23.
Multiple algorithms have been developed to identify and characterize the high-need (HN) Medicare population. However, they vary in components and yield different populations, and were developed for varying purposes. We compared the performance of existing survey and claims-based definitions in identifying HN beneficiaries and predicting poor outcomes among a community-dwelling population.
A retrospective cohort study using Round 5 (2015) of the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) linked with Medicare claims. We applied HN definitions from previous studies to our cohort of community-dwelling, fee-for-service beneficiaries (n = 4201) using sampling weights to obtain nationally representative estimates. The Bélanger et al. (2019) definition defines HN as individuals with complex conditions, multi-morbidity, acute and post-acute healthcare utilization, dependency in activities of daily living, and frailty. The Hayes et al. (2016) definition defines HN as individuals with 3+ chronic conditions and a functional limitation. We applied each definition to survey and claims data. Outcomes were hospitalization or mortality in the subsequent year.
The proportion of NHATS respondents classified as HN varied greatly across definitions, ranging from 3.1% using the claims-based Hayes definition to 32.9% using the survey-based Bélanger definition. HN respondents had significantly higher mortality and hospitalization rates in 2016. Although all definitions had good specificity, none were able to predict outcomes in the following year with good accuracy.
While mortality and hospitalization rates were significantly higher among respondents classified as HN, existing claims and survey-based HN definitions were not able to accurately predict future outcomes in a community-dwelling, nationally representative sample measured by the area under the curve.
已经开发出多种算法来识别和描述高需求(HN)医疗保险人群。然而,它们在组成部分和产生的人群方面存在差异,并且是为不同的目的而开发的。我们比较了现有的调查和基于索赔的定义在识别 HN 受益人和预测居住在社区的人群不良结局方面的性能。
这是一项使用与医疗保险索赔相关联的国家健康与老龄化趋势研究(NHATS)第五轮(2015 年)的回顾性队列研究。我们使用抽样权重将先前研究中的 HN 定义应用于我们的社区居住、按服务收费受益人群(n=4201),以获得全国代表性的估计值。Bélanger 等人(2019 年)的定义将 HN 定义为患有复杂疾病、多种疾病、急性和急性后医疗保健利用、日常生活活动依赖和脆弱的个体。Hayes 等人(2016 年)的定义将 HN 定义为患有 3 种或以上慢性疾病和功能障碍的个体。我们将每个定义应用于调查和索赔数据。结果是下一年的住院或死亡。
使用基于索赔的 Hayes 定义,NHATS 受访者中被归类为 HN 的比例从 3.1%到使用基于调查的 Bélanger 定义的 32.9%差异很大。HN 受访者在 2016 年的死亡率和住院率显著更高。尽管所有定义都具有很好的特异性,但没有一个能够很好地准确预测下一年的结果。
虽然被归类为 HN 的受访者的死亡率和住院率显著更高,但在一个全国代表性的社区居住样本中,使用曲线下面积衡量,现有的基于索赔和基于调查的 HN 定义都无法准确预测未来的结果。