Chen Amanda C, McWilliams J Michael
Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Maryland, USA.
Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Cambridge, Maryland, USA.
Health Serv Res. 2025 Jul 24:e70017. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.70017.
To compare outcomes between patients admitted to different clinicians within skilled nursing facilities for post-acute care, leveraging the plausibly random distribution of patients to admitting clinicians in the case of clinicians who specialize in nursing facility care (SNFists). We also compare patient outcomes between SNFists who are physicians versus advanced practice providers (APPs).
We used multi-level modeling to estimate within-SNF variation in the characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted to different SNFists and linear regression to compare patient characteristics and outcomes between physician and APP SNFists. Our main outcomes were 30-day hospitalizations, 30-day mortality, and antipsychotic use.
We analyzed claims data for a 20% sample of traditional Medicare beneficiaries admitted to a SNF for post-acute care from 2016 to 2019.
The sample included 81,789 post-acute patients seen by 6273 SNFists at 1479 facilities between 2016 and 2019. Within-facility variation in patient characteristics across admitting SNFists was modest and substantially greater across admitting clinicians who were not SNFists, consistent with our key assumption that patients are distributed in a more balanced fashion across admitting clinicians who are SNFists. With patient-level confounding limited by this focus on SNFists, there was minimal to modest variation in the rates of mortality (adjusted standard deviation: -0.14), hospitalization (0.40), and antipsychotic use (1.10) across admitting clinicians. Outcomes also did not differ between APP and physician admitting SNFists (mortality: 0.001 [95% CI: -0.001, 0.003]; hospitalization: 0.004 [95% CI: -0.001, 0.010], antipsychotic use: -0.001 [95% CI: -0.006, 0.003]). In contrast, outcomes varied substantially across admitting clinicians who were not SNFists.
Quasi-experimental assignment of patients to clinicians in SNFs reveals that the admitting clinician appears to have little influence on key outcomes in the post-acute setting, in contrast with similar research conducted in other care settings. An analysis of non-SNFists might falsely conclude that the impact of clinician factors is large because of evident non-random sorting of patients to non-SNFist clinicians in SNFs.
在专业护理机构中,利用患者在专业护理机构医生(SNFist)间看似随机的分配情况,比较入住不同医生处接受急性后期护理的患者的治疗结果。我们还比较了医生SNFist和高级执业提供者(APP)这两类SNFist的患者治疗结果。
我们使用多层次模型来估计入住不同SNFist的患者特征和结果在护理机构内的差异,并使用线性回归来比较医生SNFist和APP SNFist之间的患者特征和结果。我们的主要结果是30天内住院情况、30天死亡率和抗精神病药物使用情况。
我们分析了2016年至2019年入住专业护理机构接受急性后期护理的传统医疗保险受益人的20%样本的理赔数据。
样本包括2016年至2019年期间在1479家机构中由6273名SNFist诊治的81789名急性后期患者。在不同SNFist间,患者特征在机构内的差异较小,而在非SNFist的收治医生间差异则大得多,这与我们的关键假设一致,即患者在SNFist收治医生间的分布更为均衡。由于聚焦于SNFist,患者层面的混杂因素有限,不同收治医生间的死亡率(调整后标准差:-0.14)、住院率(0.40)和抗精神病药物使用率(1.10)的差异极小至中等。APP SNFist和医生SNFist的治疗结果也没有差异(死亡率:0.001 [95%置信区间:-0.001, 0.003];住院率:0.004 [95%置信区间:-0.001, 0.010],抗精神病药物使用率:-0.001 [95%置信区间:-0.006, 0.003])。相比之下,非SNFist的收治医生间的治疗结果差异很大。
在专业护理机构中,将患者准实验性地分配给医生的研究表明,与在其他护理环境中进行的类似研究相比,收治医生对急性后期环境中的关键结果似乎影响很小。对非SNFist的分析可能会错误地得出结论,认为医生因素的影响很大,因为在专业护理机构中患者向非SNFist医生的分配明显是非随机的。