Search

Informal care, or care provided by family and friends, is the most common form of care received by community-dwelling older adults with functional limitations. However, less is known about informal care provision within residential care settings including residential care facilities (for example, assisted living) and nursing homes. Using data from the Health and Retirement Study (2016) and the National Health and Aging Trends Study (2015), we found that informal care was common among older adults with functional limitations, whether they lived in the community, a residential care facility, or a nursing home. The hours of informal care provided were also nontrivial across all settings. This evidence suggests that informal caregiving and some of the associated burdens do not end when a person transitions from the community to residential care or a nursing home setting. It also points to the large role that families play in the care and well-being of these residents, which is especially important considering the recent visitor bans during the COVID-19 epidemic. Family members are an invisible workforce in nursing homes and residential care facilities, providing considerable front-line work for their loved ones. Providers and policy makers could improve the lives of both the residents and their caregivers by acknowledging, incorporating, and supporting this workforce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critical access hospitals are important providers of care for rural and other underserved communities, but they face staffing and quality challenges while operating with low margins. Medicaid expansion has been found to improve hospital finances broadly and therefore may have permitted sustained investments in staffing and quality improvement at these vulnerable hospitals. In this difference-in-differences analysis, we found that critical access hospitals in Medicaid expansion states did not have statistically significant postexpansion increases in operating margins relative to hospitals in nonexpansion states. Nor did we see evidence of statistically significant differential improvement at critical access hospitals in expansion versus nonexpansion states on either staffing measures (physicians and registered nurses per 1,000 patient days) or quality measures (percentage-point changes in readmissions and mortality within thirty days of admission for pneumonia or heart failure). These findings suggest that critical access hospitals may need to take additional measures to bolster finances to provide continued support for the delivery of high-quality care to rural and other underserved communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior research and the popular press have anecdotally reported inadequate nursing home staffing levels during the COVID-19 pandemic. Maintaining adequate staffing levels is critical to ensuring high-quality nursing home care and an effective response to the pandemic. We therefore sought to examine nursing home staffing levels during the first nine months of 2020 (compared with the same period in 2019), using auditable daily payroll-based staffing data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We found that the total number of hours of direct care nursing declined in nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic, as did the average nursing home census. When we accounted for changes in census, the number of nurse staff hours per resident day remained steady or, if anything, increased slightly during the pandemic. The observed increases in staff hours per resident day were small but concentrated in nursing homes operating in counties with high COVID-19 prevalence, in nursing homes with low Medicaid census (which typically have more financial resources), and in not-for-profit nursing homes (which typically invest more in staffing). These findings raise concerns that although the number of staff hours in nursing homes did not decline, the perception of shortages has been driven by increased stresses and demands on staff time due to the pandemic, which are harder to quantify. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The past several decades have seen significant policy efforts to improve the quality of care in nursing homes, but the patient safety movement has largely ignored this setting. In this study we compared nursing homes' performance on several composite quality measures from Nursing Home Compare, the most prominent recent example of a national policy aimed at improving the quality of nursing home care, to their performance on measures of patient safety in nursing homes such as pressure sores, infections, falls, and medication errors. Although Nursing Home Compare captures some aspects of patient safety, we found the relationship to be weak and somewhat inconsistent, leaving consumers who care about patient safety with little guidance. We recommend that Nursing Home Compare be refined to provide a clearer picture of patient safety and quality of life, allowing consumers to weight these domains according to their preferences and priorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known about how real-time online rating platforms such as Yelp may complement the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, which is the US standard for evaluating patients' experiences after hospitalization. We compared the content of Yelp narrative reviews of hospitals to the topics in the HCAHPS survey, called domains in HCAHPS terminology. While the domains included in Yelp reviews covered the majority of HCAHPS domains, Yelp reviews covered an additional twelve domains not found in HCAHPS. The majority of Yelp topics that most strongly correlate with positive or negative reviews are not measured or reported by HCAHPS. The large collection of patient- and caregiver-centered experiences found on Yelp can be analyzed with natural language processing methods, identifying for policy makers the measures of hospital quality that matter most to patients and caregivers. The Yelp measures and analysis can also provide actionable feedback for hospitals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medicare's new hospital pay-for-performance program for all acute care hospitals will begin in October 2012. It will be the largest Medicare quality improvement initiative for hospitals to date. Using 2009 data on hospital performance, we calculated hospital performance scores and projected payments under the new program for all eligible hospitals. Despite differences across hospitals in terms of performance, expected changes in payments were small, even for hospitals with the best and worst performance scores. Almost two-thirds of hospitals would experience changes of just a fraction of 1 percent. Although the program will in effect redistribute resources among hospitals, our data suggest that the redistribution is not likely to cause major problems because the amount being redistributed is also small. These results raise questions about whether the new pay-for-performance program will substantially alter the quality of hospital care, and they highlight the challenges of designing effective quality improvement incentives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The payment approach known as "pay-for-performance" has been widely adopted with the aim of improving the quality of health care. Nonetheless, little is known about how to use the approach most effectively to improve care. We examined the effects in 260 hospitals of a pay-for-performance demonstration project carried out by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in partnership with Premier Inc., a nationwide hospital system. We compared these results to those of a control group of 780 hospitals not in the demonstration project. The performance of the hospitals in the project initially improved more than the performance of the control group: More than half of the pay-for- performance hospitals achieved high performance scores, compared to fewer than a third of the control hospitals. However, after five years, the two groups' scores were virtually identical. Improvements were largest among hospitals that were eligible for larger bonuses, were well financed, or operated in less competitive markets. These findings suggest that tailoring pay-for-performance programs to hospitals' specific situations could have the greatest effect on health care quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services publicly reports so-called process performance at all U.S. hospitals, such as whether certain recommended treatments are given to specific types of patients. We examined whether hospital performance on key process indicators improved during the three years since this reporting began. We also studied whether or not these changes improved patient outcomes or yielded other quality improvements, such as reduced hospital readmission rates. We found that, from 2004 to 2006, hospital process performance improved and was associated with better patient and quality outcomes. Most notably, for acute myocardial infarction, performance improvements were associated with declines in mortality rates, lengths-of-stay, and readmission rates. Although we cannot conclude that public reporting caused the improvement in processes or outcomes, these results are encouraging, since improving process performance may improve quality more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The traditional approaches to improving the quality of care at U.S. nursing homes-regulation, inspection, and accountability through public reporting-have produced modest results. Greater progress could be made by focusing incentives on broader processes related to improving quality. This could foster a culture of upstream identification and solving of problems that would supplement existing downstream requirements to meet specific safety and care standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent trends in U.S. long-term care policy reflect three broad goals Americans have for the quality of long-term care: improving quality of life, reducing fragmentation of delivery and financing, and increasing use of home and community-based care. At the same time, market-based reforms-namely, public reporting and pay-for-performance-have taken on their own momentum, aimed at improving the clinical quality of care among nursing home and home health care providers. The focus of reporting systems should be broadened to include quality of life in addition to clinical quality and to make measures less dependent on the setting in which care is delivered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although pay-for-performance (P4P) is being widely adopted, little is known about how different P4P strategies affect provider payment. These differences may be essential in motivating and maximizing quality improvement across all providers. We review hospitals' P4P strategies and describe differences in payments by size of reward; payment differences between high- and low-performing providers; ability to reward improvement in the absence of high performance; and the percentage of payments based on performance. Bonuses vary considerably by payment strategy, which suggests that the strategy selected should vary depending on program goals. These findings are relevant to P4P for any type of provider. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While early evidence suggests that accountable care organizations (ACOs) are associated with higher quality and lower costs, there have been simultaneous concerns that ACOs may incentivize consolidation of physician groups. This is particularly concerning as previous research has shown that consolidation is associated with lower quality and higher prices. Using a difference-in differences strategy and data from the Medicare Shared Savings Program, which began in 2012, we examined whether physician practices consolidated after ACOs entered health care markets. We observed a 4.0-percentage-point increase in large practices (those with fifty or more physicians) in counties with the greatest ACO penetration, compared to counties with zero ACO penetration, and a 2.7-percentage-point decline in the percentage of small practices (ten or fewer physicians) from 2010 to 2015. The growth of large practices was concentrated in specialty and hospital-owned practices. These findings suggest that ACOs may contribute to the concentration of physician practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A goal of Medicare's bundled payment models is to improve quality and control costs after hospital discharge. Little is known about how participating hospitals are focusing their efforts to achieve these objectives, particularly around the use of skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). To understand hospitals' approaches, we conducted semistructured interviews with an executive or administrator in each of twenty-two hospitals and health systems participating in Medicare's Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model or its Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative for lower extremity joint replacement episodes. We identified two major organizational responses. One principal strategy was to reduce SNF referrals, using risk-stratification tools, patient education, home care supports, and linkages with home health agencies to facilitate discharges to home. Another was to enhance integration with SNFs: fifteen hospitals or health systems in our sample had formed networks of preferred SNFs to exert influence over SNF quality and costs. Common coordination strategies included sharing access to electronic medical records, embedding providers across facilities, hiring dedicated care coordination staff, and creating platforms for data sharing. As hospitals presumably move toward home-based care and more selective SNF referrals, more evidence is needed to understand how these discharge practices affect the quality of care and patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early evidence suggested that accountable care organizations (ACOs) could improve health care quality while constraining costs, and ACOs are expanding throughout the United States. However, if disadvantaged patients have unequal access to physicians who participate in ACOs, that expansion may exacerbate health care disparities. We examined the relationship between physicians' participation in both Medicare and commercial ACOs across the country and the sociodemographic characteristics of their likely patient populations. Physicians' participation in ACOs varied widely across hospital referral regions, from nearly 0 percent to over 85 percent. After we adjusted for individual physician and practice characteristics, we found that physicians who practiced in ZIP Code Tabulation Areas where a higher percentage of the population was black, living in poverty, uninsured, or disabled or had less than a high school education--compared to other areas--had significantly lower rates of ACO participation than other physicians. Our findings suggest that vulnerable populations' access to physicians participating in ACOs may not be as great as access for other groups, which could exacerbate existing disparities in health care quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Market-based reforms in health care, such as public reporting of quality, may inadvertently exacerbate disparities. We examined how the Centers for Medicare and Medicare Services' five-star rating system for nursing homes has affected residents who are dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid ("dual eligibles"), a particularly vulnerable and disadvantaged population. Specifically, we assessed the extent to which dual eligibles and non-dual eligibles avoided the lowest-rated nursing homes and chose the highest-rated homes once the five-star rating system began, in late 2008. We found that both populations resided in better- quality homes over time but that by 2010 the increased likelihood of choosing the highest-rated homes was substantially smaller for dual eligibles than for non-dual eligibles. Thus, the gap in quality, as measured by a nursing home's star rating, grew over time. Furthermore, we found that the benefit of the five-star system to dual eligibles was largely due to providers' improving their ratings, not to consumers' choosing different providers. We present evidence suggesting that supply constraints play a role in limiting dual eligibles' responses to quality ratings, since high-quality providers tend to be located close to relatively affluent areas. Increases in Medicaid payment rates for nursing home services may be the only long-term solution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]