Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York.
Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jun 3;7(6):e2414431. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.14431.
Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment is rapidly expanding, yet Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) claims-based hospital outcome measures, including readmission rates, have historically included only fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries.
To assess the outcomes of incorporating MA data into the CMS claims-based FFS Hospital-Wide All-Cause Unplanned Readmission (HWR) measure.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study assessed differences in 30-day unadjusted readmission rates and demographic and risk adjustment variables for MA vs FFS admissions. Inpatient FFS and MA administrative claims data were extracted from the Integrated Data Repository for all admissions for Medicare beneficiaries from July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019. Measure reliability and risk-standardized readmission rates were calculated for the FFS and MA cohort vs the FFS-only cohort, overall and within specialty subgroups (cardiorespiratory, cardiovascular, medicine, surgery, neurology), then changes in hospital performance quintiles were assessed after adding MA admissions.
Risk-standardized readmission rates.
The cohort included 11 029 470 admissions (4 077 633 [37.0%] MA; 6 044 060 [54.8%] female; mean [SD] age, 77.7 [8.2] years). Unadjusted readmission rates were slightly higher for MA vs FFS admissions (15.7% vs 15.4%), yet comorbidities were generally lower among MA beneficiaries. Test-retest reliability for the FFS and MA cohort was higher than for the FFS-only cohort (0.78 vs 0.73) and signal-to-noise reliability increased in each specialty subgroup. Mean hospital risk-standardized readmission rates were similar for the FFS and MA cohort and FFS-only cohorts (15.5% vs 15.3%); this trend was consistent across the 5 specialty subgroups. After adding MA admissions to the FFS-only HWR measure, 1489 hospitals (33.1%) had their performance quintile ranking changed. As their proportion of MA admissions increased, more hospitals experienced a change in their performance quintile ranking (147 hospitals [16.3%] in the lowest quintile of percentage MA admissions; 408 [45.3%] in the highest). The combined cohort added 63 hospitals eligible for public reporting and more than 4 million admissions to the measure.
In this cohort study, adding MA admissions to the HWR measure was associated with improved measure reliability and precision and enabled the inclusion of more hospitals and beneficiaries. After MA admissions were included, 1 in 3 hospitals had their performance quintile changed, with the greatest shifts among hospitals with a high percentage of MA admissions.
医疗保险优势(MA)的注册人数正在迅速增加,但医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)的基于索赔的医院结果衡量标准,包括再入院率,历史上只包括收费服务(FFS)的受益人。
评估将 MA 数据纳入 CMS 基于索赔的 FFS 医院全因计划外再入院(HWR)衡量标准的结果。
设计、设置和参与者:这项队列研究评估了 MA 与 FFS 入院患者 30 天未调整再入院率以及人口统计学和风险调整变量之间的差异。从 2018 年 7 月 1 日至 2019 年 6 月 30 日,从所有 Medicare 受益人的综合数据存储库中提取了住院 FFS 和 MA 的行政索赔数据。计算了 FFS 和 MA 队列与仅 FFS 队列的可靠性和风险标准化再入院率,总体以及在专业亚组(心肺、心血管、内科、外科、神经科)内,然后评估在添加 MA 入院后医院绩效五分位数的变化。
风险标准化再入院率。
该队列包括 11029470 例入院(4077633 [37.0%] MA;6044060 [54.8%] 女性;平均[SD]年龄为 77.7[8.2]岁)。MA 与 FFS 入院相比,未调整的再入院率略高(15.7%比 15.4%),但 MA 受益人的合并症通常较低。FFS 和 MA 队列的测试-重测可靠性高于仅 FFS 队列(0.78 比 0.73),每个专业亚组的信号噪声可靠性都有所提高。FFS 和 MA 队列以及仅 FFS 队列的平均医院风险标准化再入院率相似(15.5%比 15.3%);这一趋势在 5 个专业亚组中均一致。将 MA 入院纳入 FFS 仅有的 HWR 衡量标准后,有 1489 家医院(33.1%)的绩效五分位排名发生了变化。随着 MA 入院比例的增加,更多的医院经历了绩效五分位排名的变化(最低五分位的 MA 入院比例中,有 147 家医院[16.3%];最高五分位的 408 家医院[45.3%])。综合队列将 63 家有资格进行公开报告的医院和超过 400 万例入院纳入了该衡量标准。
在这项队列研究中,将 MA 入院纳入 HWR 衡量标准与提高衡量标准的可靠性和精度有关,并使更多的医院和受益人能够纳入。在纳入 MA 入院后,1/3 的医院的绩效五分位发生了变化,其中 MA 入院比例较高的医院变化最大。