Search

Competing Interests: The author certifies that there are no funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article related to the author or any immediate family members. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.

Background: Treatment of heart failure is complex and inherently challenging. Patients traverse multiple practice settings as inpatients and outpatients, often resulting in fragmented care. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services is implementing payment programs that reward delivery of high-quality, cost-effective care, and one of the newer programs, the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Advanced program, attempts to improve the coordination of care across practices for a hospitalization episode and post-acute care. The quality and cost of care contribute to its value, but value may be defined in different ways by different entities., Conclusions: The rapidly changing world of digital health may contribute to or detract from the quality and cost of care. Health systems, payers, and patients are all grappling with these issues, which were reviewed at a symposium at the Heart Failure Society of America conference in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on September 14, 2019. This article constitutes the proceedings from that symposium., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: Accurate documentation of patient care and acuity is essential to determine appropriate reimbursement as well as accuracy of key publicly reported quality metrics. We sought to investigate the impact of standardized note templates by inpatient advanced practice providers (APPs) on evaluation and management (E/M) charge capture, including outside of the global surgical package (GSP), and quality metrics including case mix index (CMI) and mortality index (MI). We hypothesized this clinical documentation initiative as well as improved coding of E/M services would result in increased reimbursement and quality metrics., Methods: A documentation and coding initiative on the heart and vascular service line was initiated in 2016 with focus on improving inpatient E/M capture by APPs outside the GSP. Comprehensive training sessions and standardized documentation templates were created and implemented in the electronic medical record. Subsequent hospital care E/M (current procedural terminology codes 99231, 99232, 99233) from the years 2015 to 2017 were audited and analyzed for charge capture rates, collections, work relative value units (wRVUs), and billing complexity. Data were compared over time by standardizing CMS values and reimbursement rates. In addition, overall CMI and MI were calculated each year., Results: One year following the documentation initiative, E/M charges on the vascular surgery service line increased by 78.5% with a corresponding increase in APP charges from 0.4% of billable E/M services to 70.4% when compared with pre-initiative data. The charge capture of E/M services among all inpatients rose from 21.4% to 37.9%. Additionally, reimbursement from CMS increased by 65% as total work relative value units generated from E/M services rose by 78.4% (797 to 1422). The MI decreased over the study period by 25.4%. Additionally, there was a corresponding 5.6% increase in the cohort CMI. Distribution of E/M encounter charges did not vary significantly. Meanwhile, the prevalence of 14 clinical comorbidities in our cohort as well as length of stay (P = .88) remained non-statistically different throughout the study period., Conclusions: Accurate clinical documentation of E/M care and ultimately inpatient acuity is critical in determining quality metrics that serve as important measures of overall hospital quality for CMS value-based payments and rankings. A system-based documentation initiative and expanded role of inpatient APPs on vascular surgery teams significantly improved charge capture and reimbursement outside the GSP as well as CMI and MI in a consistently complex patient population., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: Despite its importance of quality measures used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the underlying cost-effectiveness evidence has not been examined. This study aimed to analyze cost-effectiveness evidence associated with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services quality measures., Methods: After classifying 23 quality measures with the Donabedian's structure-process-outcome quality of care model, we identified cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) relevant to these measures from the Tufts Medical Center CEA Registry based on the PICOTS (population, intervention, comparator, outcome, time horizon, and setting) framework. We then summarized available incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) to determine the cost-effectiveness of the quality measures., Results: The 23 quality measures were categorized into 14 process, 7 outcome, and 2 structure measures. Cost-effectiveness evidence was only available for 8 of 14 process measures. Two measures (Tobacco Screening and Hemoglobin bA1c Control) were cost-saving and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) improving, and 5 (Depression Screening, Influenza Immunization, Colon Cancer Screening, Breast Cancer Screening, and Statin Therapy) were highly cost-effective (median ICER ≤ $50 000/QALY). The remaining measure (Fall Screening) had a median ICER of $120 000/QALY. No CEAs were available for 15 measures: 10 defined by subjective patient ratings and 5 employed outcome measures without specifying an intervention or process., Conclusions: When relevant CEAs were available, cost-effectiveness evidence was consistent with quality measures (measures were cost-effective). Nevertheless, most quality measures were based on subjective ratings or outcome measures, posing a challenge in identifying supporting economic evidence. Refining and aligning quality measures with cost-effectiveness evidence can help further improve healthcare efficiency by demonstrating that they are good indicators of both quality and cost-effectiveness of care., (Copyright © 2021 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In this study, trauma-specific risk factors of prolonged length of stay (LOS) in pediatric trauma were examined. Statistical and machine learning models were used to proffer ways to improve the quality of care of patients at risk of prolonged length of stay and reduce cost., Methods: Data from 27 hospitals were retrieved on 81,929 hospitalizations of pediatric patients with a primary diagnosis of trauma, and for which the LOS was >24 h. Nested mixed effects model was used for simplified statistical inference, while a stochastic gradient boosting model, considering high-order statistical interactions, was built for prediction., Results: Over 18.7% of the encounters had LOS >1 week. Burns and corrosion and suspected and confirmed child abuse are the strongest drivers of prolonged LOS. Several other trauma-specific and general pediatric clinical variables were also predictors of prolonged LOS. The stochastic gradient model obtained an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.912 (0.907, 0.917)., Conclusions: The high performance of the machine learning model coupled with statistical inference from the mixed effects model provide an opportunity for targeted interventions to improve quality of care of trauma patients likely to require long length of stay., Impact: Targeted interventions on high-risk patients would improve the quality of care of pediatric trauma patients and reduce the length of stay. This comprehensive study includes data from multiple hospitals analyzed with advanced statistical and machine learning models. The statistical and machine learning models provide opportunities for targeted interventions and reduction in prolonged length of stay reducing the burden of hospitalization on families., (© 2020. International Pediatric Research Foundation, Inc.)

Objectives: To compare the safety and resource-efficacy of the fast-track (FT) concept (extubation ≤8 hours after surgery) versus the conventional approach (non-FT, >8 hours postoperatively) in infants undergoing open-heart surgery., Methods: Infants <7 kg operated on cardiopulmonary bypass between 2014 and 2018 were analyzed. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed for group comparison (FT vs non-FT). Intensive care unit (ICU) personnel use and unit performance were evaluated. Postoperative outcome and reimbursement based on German diagnosis-related groups were compared., Results: Of 717 infants (median age: 4 months, Society of Thoracic Surgeons-European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery mortality score: 0.1-4), FT extubation was achieved in 182 infants (25%). After matching, 123 pairs (FT vs non-FT) were formed without significant differences in baseline characteristics. FT versus non-FT showed a significantly shorter ICU stay (in days): 1.8 (0.9-2.8) versus 4.2 (1.9-6.4), P < .01, and postoperative length of stay (in days): 7 (6-10) versus 10 (7-15.5), P < .01; significantly lower postoperative transfusion rates: 61.3% versus 77%, P < .01; and tendency toward lower early mortality: 0% versus 2.8%, P = .08. Reintubation rate did not differ between the groups (P = .7). Despite a decrease in personnel capacity (2014 vs 2018), the unit performance was maintained. The mean case-mix-index of FT versus non-FT was 8.56 ± 6.08 versus 11.77 ± 12.10 (P < .01), resulting in 27% less reimbursement in the FT group., Conclusions: FT concept can be performed safely and resource-effectively in infants undergoing open-heart surgery. Since German diagnosis-related group systems reimburse costs, not performance, there is little incentive to avoid prolonged mechanical ventilation. Greater ICU turnover rates and excellent postoperative outcomes are not rewarded adequately., (Copyright © 2020 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To experiment with new approaches of collaboration in healthcare delivery, local authorities implement new models of care. Regarding the local decision context of these models, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) may be of added value to cost-utility analysis (CUA), because it covers a wider range of outcomes. This study compares the 2 methods using a side-by-side application., Methods: A new Dutch model of care, Primary Care Plus (PC+), was used as a case study to compare the results of CUA and MCDA. Data of patients referred to PC+ or care-as-usual were retrieved by questionnaires and administrative databases with a 3-month follow-up. Propensity score matching together with generalized linear regression models was used to reduce confounding. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore uncertainty in the results., Results: Although both methods indicated PC+ as the dominant alternative, complementary differences were observed. MCDA provided additional evidence that PC+ improved access to care (standardized performance score of 0.742 vs 0.670) and that improvement in health-related quality of life was driven by the psychological well-being component (standardized performance score of 0.710 vs 0.704). Furthermore, MCDA estimated the budget required for PC+ to be affordable in addition to preferable (€521.42 per patient). Additionally, MCDA was less sensitive to the utility measures used., Conclusions: MCDA may facilitate an auditable and transparent evaluation of new models of care by providing additional information on a wider range of outcomes and incorporating affordability. However, more effort is needed to increase the usability of MCDA among local decision makers., (Copyright © 2021 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are elicited directly from patients so they can describe their overall health status, including their symptoms, function, and quality of life. While commonly used as end points in clinical trials, PROs can play an important role in routine clinical care, population health management, and as a means for quantifying the quality of patient care. In this review, we propose that PROs be used to improve patient-centered care in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases given their importance to patients and society and their ability to improve doctor- provider communication. Furthermore, given the current variability in patients' health status across different clinics and the fact that PROs can be improved by titrating therapy, we contend that PROs have a key opportunity to serve as measures of healthcare quality., Competing Interests: Dr. Garcia is supported by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institutes of Health Under Aware Number 5T32H110837. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Dr. Spertus discloses grant funding from NIH and Abbott Vascular. He serves on a scientific advisory board for United Healthcare and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas City and is a consultant for Novartis, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Merck, Myokardia, and Amgen. He has intellectual property rights for the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, Seattle Angina Questionnaire, and Peripheral Artery Questionnaire and an equity interest in Health Outcomes Sciences.

The Society for Vascular Surgery Alternative Payment Model (APM) Taskforce document explores the drivers and implications for developing objective value-based reimbursement plans for the care of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The APM is a payment approach that highlights high-quality and cost-efficient care and is a financially incentivized pathway for participation in the Quality Payment Program, which aims to replace the traditional fee-for-service payment method. At present, the participation of vascular specialists in APMs is hampered owing to the absence of dedicated models. The increasing prevalence of PAD diagnosis, technological advances in therapeutic devices, and the increasing cost of care of the affected patients have financial consequences on care delivery models and population health. The document summarizes the existing measurement methods of cost, care processes, and outcomes using payor data, patient-reported outcomes, and registry participation. The document also evaluates the existing challenges in the evaluation of PAD care, including intervention overuse, treatment disparities, varied clinical presentations, and the effects of multiple comorbid conditions on the cost potentially attributable to the vascular interventionalist. Medicare reimbursement data analysis also confirmed the prolonged need for additional healthcare services after vascular interventions. The Society for Vascular Surgery proposes that a PAD APM should provide patients with comprehensive care using a longitudinal approach with integration of multiple key medical and surgical services. It should maintain appropriate access to diagnostic and therapeutic advancements and eliminate unnecessary interventions. It should also decrease the variability in care but must also consider the varying complexity of the presenting PAD conditions. Enhanced quality of care and physician innovation should be rewarded. In addition, provisions should be present within an APM for high-risk patients who carry the risk of exclusion from care because of the naturally associated high costs. Although the document demonstrates clear opportunities for quality improvement and cost savings in PAD care, continued PAD APM development requires the assessment of more granular data for accurate risk adjustment, in addition to largescale testing before public release. Collaboration between payors and physician specialty societies remains key., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: National essential medicines lists are used to guide medicine reimbursement and public sector medicine procurement for many countries therefore medicine listings may impact health outcomes., Methods: Countries' national essential medicines lists were scored on whether they listed proven medicines for ischemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease and hypertensive heart disease. In this cross sectional study linear regression was used to measure the association between countries' medicine coverage scores and healthcare access and quality scores., Results: There was an association between healthcare access and quality scores and health expenditure for ischemic heart disease (p ≤ 0.001), cerebrovascular disease (p ≤ 0.001) and hypertensive heart disease (p ≤ 0.001). However, there was no association between medicine coverage scores and healthcare access and quality scores for ischemic heart disease (p = 0.252), cerebrovascular disease (p = 0.194) and hypertensive heart disease (p = 0.209) when country characteristics were accounted for., Conclusions: Listing more medicines on national essential medicines lists may only be one factor in reducing mortality from cardiovascular disease and improving healthcare access and quality scores.

Background: Reintervention after endovascular repair (EVR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms is common. However, the cumulative financial impact of reintervention after EVR on a national scale is poorly defined. Our objective was to describe the cost to Medicare for aneurysm treatment (EVR plus reinterventions) among a cohort of patients with known follow-up for 5 years after repair., Methods: We identified patients who underwent EVR within the Vascular Quality Initiative who were linked to their respective Medicare claims file (n = 13,995). We excluded patients who underwent EVR after September 30, 2010, and those who had incomplete Medicare coverage (n = 12,788). The remaining cohort (n = 1207) had complete follow-up until death or 5 years (Medicare data available through September 30, 2015). We then obtained and compiled the corresponding Medicare reimbursement data for the index EVR hospitalization and all subsequent reinterventions., Results: We studied 1207 Medicare patients who underwent EVR and had known follow-up for reinterventions for 5 years. The mean age was 76.2 years (±7.1 years), 21.6% of patients were female, and 91.1% of procedures were elective. The Kaplan-Meier reintervention rate at 5 years was 18%. Among patients who underwent reintervention, 154 (73.7%) had a single reintervention, 40 (19.1%) had two reinterventions, and 15 (7.2%) had three or more reinterventions. The median cost to Medicare for the index EVR hospitalization was $25,745 (interquartile range, $21,131-$28,774). The median cost for subsequent reinterventions was $22,165 (interquartile range, $17,152-$29,605). The cumulative cost to Medicare of aneurysm treatment (EVR plus reinterventions) increased in a stepwise fashion among patients who underwent multiple reinterventions, with each reintervention being similar in cost to the index EVR., Conclusions: The overall cost incurred by Medicare to reimburse for each reintervention after EVR is roughly the same as for the initial procedure itself, meaning that Medicare cost projections would be greater than $100,000 for any individual who undergoes an EVR with three reinterventions. The long-term financial impact of EVR must be considered by surgeons, patients, and healthcare systems alike as these cumulative costs may hinder the fiscal viability of an EVR-first therapeutic approach and highlight the need for judicious patient selection paradigms., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Enhanced Recovery (ER) is a change management framework in which a multidisciplinary team of stakeholders utilizes evidence-based medicine to protocolize all aspects of a surgical care to allow more rapid return of function. While service-specific reports of ER adoption are common, institutional-wide adoption is complex, and reports of institution-wide ER adoption are lacking in the United States. We hypothesized that ER principles were generalizable across an institution and could be implemented across a multitude of surgical disciplines with improvements in length of stay, opioid consumption, and cost of care., Methods: Following the establishment of a formal institutional ER program, ER was adopted in 9 distinct surgical subspecialties over 5 years at an academic medical center. We compared length of stay, opioid consumption, and total cost of care in all surgical subspecialties as a function of time using a segmented regression/interrupted time series statistical model., Results: There were 7774 patients among 9 distinct surgical populations including 2155 patients in the pre-ER cohort and 5619 patients in the post-ER cohort. The introduction of an ER protocol was associated with several significant changes: a reduction in length of stay in 5 of 9 specialties; reduction in opioid consumption in 8 specialties; no change or reduction in maximum patient-reported pain scores; and reduction or no change in hospital costs in all specialties. The ER program was associated with an aggregate increase in profit over the study period., Conclusions: Institution-wide efforts to adopt ER can generate significant improvements in patient care, opioid consumption, hospital capacity, and profitability within a large academic medical center., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2020 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: Critical access hospitals (CAHs) play an important role in providing access to care for many patients in rural communities. Prior studies have shown that these facilities are able to provide timely and quality care for patients who undergo various elective and emergency general surgical procedures. However, little is known about the quality and reimbursement of surgical care for patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures at CAHs compared with non-CAH facilities., Questions/purposes: Are there any differences in 90-day complications, readmissions, mortality, and Medicare payments between patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures at CAHs and those undergoing surgery at non-CAHs?, Methods: The 2005 to 2014 Medicare 100% Standard Analytical Files were queried using ICD-9 procedure codes to identify Medicare-eligible beneficiaries undergoing open reduction and internal fixation (79.15, 79.35, and 78.55), hemiarthroplasty (81.52), and THA (81.51) for isolated closed hip fractures. This database was selected because the claims capture inpatient diagnoses, procedures, charged amounts and paid claims, as well as hospital-level information of the care, of Medicare patients across the nation. Patients with concurrent fixation of an upper extremity, lower extremity, and/or polytrauma were excluded from the study to ensure an isolated cohort of hip fractures was captured. The study cohort was divided into two groups based on where the surgery took place: CAHs and non-CAHs. A 1:1 propensity score match, adjusting for baseline demographics (age, gender, Census Bureau-designated region, and Elixhauser comorbidity index), clinical characteristics (fixation type and time to surgery), and hospital characteristics (whether the hospital was located in a rural ZIP code, the average annual procedure volume of the operating facility, hospital bed size, hospital ownership and teaching status), was used to control for the presence of baseline differences in patients presenting at CAHs and those presenting at non-CAHs. A total of 1,467,482 patients with hip fractures were included, 29,058 of whom underwent surgery in a CAH. After propensity score matching, each cohort (CAH and non-CAH) contained 29,058 patients. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess for differences in 90-day complications, readmissions, and mortality between the two matched cohorts. As funding policies of CAHs are regulated by Medicare, an evaluation of costs-of-care (by using Medicare payments as a proxy) was conducted. Generalized linear regression modeling was used to assess the 90-day Medicare payments among patients undergoing surgery in a CAH, while controlling for differences in baseline demographics and clinical characteristics., Results: Patients undergoing surgery for hip fractures were less likely to experience many serious complications at a critical access hospital (CAH) than at a non-CAH. In particular, after controlling for patient demographics, hospital-level factors and procedural characteristics, patients treated at a CAH were less likely to experience: myocardial infarction (3% (916 of 29,058) versus 4% (1126 of 29,058); OR 0.80 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.88]; p < 0.001), sepsis (3% (765 of 29,058) versus 4% (1084 of 29,058); OR 0.69 [95% CI 0.63 to 0.78]; p < 0.001), acute renal failure (6% (1605 of 29,058) versus 8% (2353 of 29,058); OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.61 to 0.69]; p < 0.001), and Clostridium difficile infections (1% (367 of 29,058) versus 2% (473 of 29,058); OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.88]; p < 0.001) than undergoing surgery in a non-CAH. CAHs also had lower rates of all-cause 90-day readmissions (18% (5133 of 29,058) versus 20% (5931 of 29,058); OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.79 to 0.86]; p < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (4% (1273 of 29,058) versus 5% (1437 of 29,058); OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.82 to 0.95]; p = 0.001) than non-CAHs. Further, CAHs also had risk-adjusted lower 90-day Medicare payments than non-CAHs (USD 800, standard error 89; p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Patients who received hip fracture surgical care at CAHs had a lower risk of major medical and surgical complications than those who had surgery at non-CAHs, even though Medicare reimbursements were lower as well. Although there may be some degree of patient selection at CAHs, these facilities appear to provide high-value care to rural communities. These findings provide evidence for policymakers evaluating the impact of the CAH program and allocating funding resources, as well as for community members seeking emergent care at local CAH facilities., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study., Competing Interests: Each author certifies that neither he or she, nor any member of his or her immediate family, has funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request., (Copyright © 2020 by the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.)

BACKGROUND: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have the potential to lower costs and improve quality through incentives and coordinated care. However, the design brings with it many new challenges. One such challenge is the optimal use of pharmaceuticals. Most ACOs have not yet focused on this integral facet of care, even though medications are a critical component to achieving the lower costs and improved quality that are anticipated with this new model. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether ACOs are prepared to maximize the value of medications for achieving quality benchmarks and cost offsets. METHODS: During the fall of 2012, an electronic readiness self-assessment was developed using a portion of the questions and question methodology from the National Survey of Accountable Care Organizations, along with original questions developed by the authors. The assessment was tested and subsequently revised based on feedback from pilot testing with 5 ACO representatives. The revised assessment was distributed via e-mail to a convenience sample (n=175) of ACO members of the American Medical Group Association, Brookings-Dartmouth ACO Learning Network, and Premier Healthcare Alliance. RESULTS: The self-assessment was completed by 46 ACO representatives (26% response rate). ACOs reported high readiness to manage medications in a few areas, such as transmitting prescriptions electronically (70%), being able to integrate medical and pharmacy data into a single database (54%), and having a formulary in place that encourages generic use when appropriate (50%). However, many areas have substantial room for improvement with few ACOs reporting high readiness. Some notable areas include being able to quantify the cost offsets and hence demonstrate the value of appropriate medication use (7%), notifying a physician when a prescription has been filled (9%), having protocols in place to avoid medication duplication and polypharmacy (17%), and having quality metrics in place for a broad diversity of conditions (22%). CONCLUSIONS: Developing the capabilities to support, monitor, and ensure appropriate medication use will be critical to achieve optimal patient outcomes and ACO success. The ACOs surveyed have embarked upon an important journey towards this goal, but critical gaps remain before they can become fully accountable. While many of these organizations have begun adopting health information technologies that allow them to maximize the value of medications for achieving quality outcomes and cost offsets, a significant lag was identified in their inability to use these technologies to their full capacities. In order to provide further guidance, the authors have begun documenting case studies for public release that would provide ACOs with examples of how certain medication issues have been addressed by ACOs or relevant organizations. The authors hope that these case studies will help ACOs optimize the value of pharmaceuticals and achieve the "triple aim" of improving care, health, and cost. DISCLOSURES: There was no outside funding for this study, and the authors report no conflicts of interest related to the article. Concept and design were primarily from Dubois and Kotzbauer, with help from Feldman, Penso, and Westrich. Data collection was done by Feldman, Penso, Pope, and Westrich, and all authors participated in data interpretation. The manuscript was written primarily by Westrich, with help from all other authors, and revision was done primarily by Lustig and Westrich, with help from all other authors.

Background Over 180 000 coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedures are performed annually, accounting for $7 to $10 billion in episode expenditures. Assessing tradeoffs between spending and quality contributing to value during 90-day episodes has not been conducted but is essential for success in bundled reimbursement models. We, therefore, identified determinants of variability in hospital 90-day episode value for CABG. Methods Medicare and private payor admissions for isolated CABG from 2014 to 2016 were retrospectively linked to clinical registry data for 33 nonfederal hospitals in Michigan. Hospital composite risk-adjusted complication rates (≥1 National Quality Forum-endorsed, Society of Thoracic Surgeons measure: deep sternal wound infection, renal failure, prolonged ventilation >24 hours, stroke, re-exploration, and operative mortality) and 90-day risk-adjusted, price-standardized episode payments were used to categorize hospitals by value by defining the intersection between complications and spending. Results Among 2573 total patients, those at low- versus high-value hospitals had a higher percentage of prolonged length of stay >14 days (9.3% versus 2.4%, P =0.006), prolonged ventilation (17.6% versus 4.8%, P <0.001), and operative mortality (4.8% versus 0.6%, P =0.001). Mean total episode payments were $51 509 at low-compared with $45 526 at high-value hospitals ( P <0.001), driven by higher readmission ($3675 versus $2177, P =0.005), professional ($7462 versus $6090, P <0.001), postacute care ($7315 versus $5947, P =0.031), and index hospitalization payments ($33 474 versus $30 800, P <0.001). Among patients not experiencing a complication or 30-day readmission (1923/2573, 74.7%), low-value hospitals had higher inpatient evaluation and management payments ($1405 versus $752, P <0.001) and higher utilization of inpatient rehabilitation (7% versus 2%, P <0.001), but lower utilization of home health (66% versus 73%, P =0.016) and emergency department services (13% versus 17%, P =0.034). Conclusions To succeed in emerging bundled reimbursement programs for CABG, hospitals and physicians should identify strategies to minimize complications while optimizing inpatient evaluation and management spending and use of inpatient rehabilitation, home health, and emergency department services.

Over the past two decades, Medicare and other payers have been looking at ways to base payment for cardiovascular care on the quality and outcomes of care delivered. Public reporting of hospital performance on a series of quality measures began in 2004 with basic processes of care such as aspirin use and influenza vaccination, and it expanded in later years to include outcomes such as mortality and readmission rates. Following the passage of the Affordable Care Act in March 2010, Medicare and other payers moved forward with pay-for-performance programs, more commonly referred to as value-based purchasing (VBP) programs. These programs are largely based on an underlying fee-for-service payment infrastructure and give hospitals and clinicians bonuses or penalties based on their performance. Another new payment mechanism, called alternative payment models (APMs), aims to move towards episode-based or global payments to improve quality and efficiency. The two most relevant APMs for cardiovascular care include Accountable Care Organizations and bundled payments. Both VBP programs and APMs have challenges related to program efficacy, accuracy, and equity. In fact, despite over a decade of progress in measuring and incentivizing high-quality care delivery within cardiology, major limitations remain. Many of the programs have had little benefit in terms of clinical outcomes yet have led to marked administrative burden for participants. However, there are several encouraging prospects to aid the successful implementation of value-based high-quality cardiovascular care, such as more sophisticated data science to improve risk adjustment and flexible electronic health records to decrease administrative burden. Furthermore, payment models designed specifically for cardiovascular care could incentivize innovative care delivery models that could improve quality and outcomes for patients. This review provides an overview of current efforts, largely at the federal level, to pay for high-quality cardiovascular care and discusses the challenges and prospects related to doing so., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Disclosure: Dr. Joynt Maddox does contract work for the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. There are no other financial conflicts of interest to report., (© 2020 Houston Methodist Hospital Houston, Texas.)

Background: Healthcare payers in the United States are increasingly tying provider payments to quality and value using pay-for-performance policies. Cost-effectiveness analysis quantifies value in healthcare but is not currently used to design or prioritize pay-for-performance strategies or metrics. Acute ischemic stroke care provides a useful application to demonstrate how simulation modeling can be used to determine cost-effective levels of financial incentives used in pay-for-performance policies and associated challenges with this approach., Methods and Results: Our framework requires a simulation model that can estimate quality-adjusted life years and costs resulting from improvements in a quality metric. A monetary level of incentives can then be back-calculated using the lifetime discounted quality-adjusted life year (which includes effectiveness of quality improvement) and cost (which includes incentive payments and cost offsets from quality improvements) outputs from the model. We applied this framework to an acute ischemic stroke microsimulation model to calculate the difference in population-level net monetary benefit (willingness-to-pay of $50 000 to $150 000/quality-adjusted life year) accrued under current Medicare policy (stroke payment not adjusted for performance) compared with various hypothetical pay-for-performance policies. Performance measurement was based on time-to-thrombolytic treatment with tPA (tissue-type plasminogen activator). Compared with current payment, equivalent population-level net monetary benefit was achieved in pay-for-performance policies with 10-minute door-to-needle time reductions (5057 more acute ischemic stroke cases/y in the 0-3-hour window) incentivized by increasing tPA payment by as much as 18% to 44% depending on willingness-to-pay for health., Conclusions: Cost-effectiveness modeling can be used to determine the upper bound of financial incentives used in pay-for-performance policies, although currently, this approach is limited due to data requirements and modeling assumptions. For tPA payments in acute ischemic stroke, our model-based results suggest financial incentives leading to a 10-minute decrease in door-to-needle time should be implemented but not exceed 18% to 44% of current tPA payment. In general, the optimal level of financial incentives will depend on willingness-to-pay for health and other modeling assumptions around parameter uncertainty and the relationship between quality improvements and long-run quality-adjusted life expectancy and costs.

Utilization management strategies, including prior authorization, are commonly used to facilitate safe and guideline-adherent provision of new, individualized, and potentially costly cardiovascular therapies. However, as currently deployed, these approaches encumber multiple stakeholders. Patients are discouraged by barriers to appropriate access; clinicians are frustrated by the time, money, and resources required for prior authorizations, the frequent rejections, and the perception of being excluded from the decision-making process; and payers are weary of the intensive effort to design and administer increasingly complex prior authorization systems to balance value and appropriate use of these treatments. These issues highlight an opportunity to collectively reimagine utilization management as a transparent and collaborative system. This would benefit the entire healthcare ecosystem, especially in light of the shift to value-based payment. This article describes the efforts and vision of the multistakeholder Prior Authorization Learning Collaborative of the Value in Healthcare Initiative, a partnership between the American Heart Association and the Robert J. Margolis, MD, Center for Health Policy at Duke University. We outline how healthcare organizations can take greater utilization management responsibility under value-based contracting, especially under different state policies and local contexts. Even with reduced payer-mandated prior authorization in these arrangements, payers and healthcare organizations will have a continued shared need for utilization management. We present options for streamlining these programs, such as gold carding and electronic and automated prior authorization processes. Throughout the article, we weave in examples from cardiovascular care when possible. Although reimagining prior authorization requires collective action by all stakeholders, it may significantly reduce administrative burden for clinicians and payers while improving outcomes for patients.

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of hospitalizations and readmissions in the United States. Particularly among the elderly, its prevalence and costs continue to rise, making it a significant population health issue. Despite tremendous progress in improving HF care and examples of innovation in care redesign, the quality of HF care varies greatly across the country. One major challenge underpinning these issues is the current payment system, which is largely based on fee-for-service reimbursement, leads to uncoordinated, fragmented, and low-quality HF care. While the payment landscape is changing, with an increasing proportion of all healthcare dollars flowing through value-based payment models, no longitudinal models currently focus on chronic HF care. Episode-based payment models for HF hospitalization have yielded limited success and have little ability to prevent early chronic disease from progressing to later stages. The available literature suggests that primary care-based longitudinal payment models have indirectly improved HF care quality and cardiovascular care costs, but these models are not focused on addressing patients' longitudinal chronic disease needs. This article describes the efforts and vision of the multi-stakeholder Value-Based Models Learning Collaborative of The Value in Healthcare Initiative, a collaboration of the American Heart Association and the Robert J. Margolis, MD, Center for Health Policy at Duke University. The Learning Collaborative developed a framework for a HF value-based payment model with a longitudinal focus on disease management (to reduce adverse clinical outcomes and disease progression among patients with stage C HF) and prevention (an optional track to prevent high-risk stage B pre-HF from progressing to stage C). The model is designed to be compatible with prevalent payment models and reforms being implemented today. Barriers to success and strategies for implementation to aid payers, regulators, clinicians, and others in developing a pilot are discussed.

Background Hospitals commonly provide a short-term supply of free P2Y 12 inhibitors at discharge after myocardial infarction, but it is unclear if these programs improve medication persistence and outcomes. The ARTEMIS (Affordability and Real-World Antiplatelet Treatment Effectiveness After Myocardial Infarction Study) trial randomized hospitals to usual care versus waived P2Y 12 inhibitor copayment costs for 1-year post-myocardial infarction. Whether the impact of this intervention differed between hospitals with and without pre-existing medication assistance programs is unknown. Methods and Results In this post hoc analysis of the ARTEMIS trial, we examined the associations of pre-study free medication programs and the randomized copayment voucher intervention with P2Y 12 inhibitor persistence (measured by pharmacy fills and patient report) and major adverse cardiovascular events using logistic regression models including a propensity score. Among 262 hospitals, 129 (49%) offered pre-study free medication assistance. One-year P2Y 12 inhibitor persistence and major adverse cardiovascular events risks were similar between patients treated at hospitals with and without free medication programs (adjusted odds ratio 0.93, 95% CI, 0.82-1.05 and hazard ratio 0.92, 95% CI, 0.80-1.07, respectively). The randomized copayment voucher intervention improved persistence, assessed by pharmacy fills, in both hospitals with (53.6% versus 44.0%, adjusted odds ratio 1.45, 95% CI, 1.20-1.75) and without (59.0% versus 48.3%, adjusted odds ratio 1.46, 95% CI, 1.25-1.70) free medication programs ( P interaction =0.71). Differences in patient-reported persistence were not significant after adjustment. Conclusions While hospitals commonly report the ability to provide free short-term P2Y 12 inhibitors, we did not find association of this with medication persistence or major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with insurance coverage for prescription medication enrolled in the ARTEMIS trial. An intervention that provided copayment assistance vouchers for 1 year was successful in improving medication persistence in hospitals with and without pre-existing short-term medication programs. Registration URL: https://www.clini​caltr​ials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT02406677.

Background: Medicare patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) have been a significant focus of value-based payment programs for outpatient practices. Physicians and policymakers, however, have voiced concern that value-based payment programs may penalize practices that serve vulnerable populations. This study evaluated whether outpatient practices that serve socioeconomically disadvantaged populations have worse CAD outcomes, and if this reflects the delivery of lower-quality care or rather, patient and community factors beyond the care provided by physician practices., Methods and Results: Retrospective cohort study of Medicare fee-for-service patients ≥65 years with CAD at outpatient practices participating in the the Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence registry from January 1, 2010 to January 1, 2015. Outpatient practices were stratified into quintiles by the proportion of most disadvantaged patients-defined by an area deprivation score in the highest 20% nationally-served at each practice site. Prescription of guideline recommended therapies for CAD as well as clinical outcomes (emergency department presentation for chest pain, hospital admission for unstable angina or acute myocardial infarction [AMI], 30-day readmission after AMI, and 30-day mortality after AMI) were evaluated by practice-level socioeconomic disadvantage with hierarchical logistic regression models, using practices serving the fewest socioeconomically disadvantaged patients as a reference. The study included 453 783 Medicare fee-for-service patients ≥65 years of age with CAD (mean [SD] age, 75.3 [7.7] years; 39.7% female) cared for at 271 outpatient practices. At practices serving the highest proportion of socioeconomically disadvantaged patients (group 5), compared with practices serving the lowest proportion (group 1), there was no significant difference in the likelihood of prescription of antiplatelet therapy (odds ratio [OR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.69-1.27]), β-blocker therapy if prior myocardial infarction or left ventricular ejection fraction <40% (OR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.69-1.35]), ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker if left ventricular ejection fraction <40% and/or diabetes mellitus (OR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.74-1.19]), statin therapy (OR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.68-1.14]), or cardiac rehabilitation (OR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.20-1.00]). Patients cared for at the most disadvantaged-serving practices (group 5) were more likely to be admitted for unstable angina (adjusted OR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.04-2.05]). There was no significant difference in the likelihood of emergency department presentation for chest pain or hospital admission for AMI between practices. Thirty day mortality rates after AMI were higher among patients at the most disadvantaged-serving practices (aOR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.02-1.68]), but 30-day readmission rates did not differ. All associations were attenuated after additional adjustment for patient-level area deprivation index., Conclusions: Physician outpatient practices that serve the most socioeconomically disadvantaged patients with CAD perform worse on some clinical outcomes, despite providing similar guideline-recommended care as other practices, and consequently could fare poorly under value-based payment programs. Social factors beyond care provided by outpatient practices may partly explain worse outcomes. Policymakers should consider accounting for socioeconomic disadvantage in value-based payment programs initiatives that target outpatient practices.

Importance: The Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 mandated a quality measure of potentially preventable 30-day hospital readmission for inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). Examining IRF performance nationally may help inform health care quality initiatives for Medicare beneficiaries., Objective: To examine variation in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Quality Reporting Program measures for US facility-level risk-adjusted all-cause and potentially preventable hospital readmission rates after inpatient rehabilitation., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of Medicare claims data included 454 378 Medicare beneficiaries discharged from 1162 IRFs between June 1, 2013, and July 1, 2015. Data were analyzed March 23, 2018, through June 24, 2019., Main Outcomes and Measures: All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities and the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation. Specifications from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were followed to identify the cohort, define outcomes, and calculate risk-standardized facility-level rates., Results: Among a cohort of 454 378 patients, the mean (SD) age was 76.2 (10.6) years and 263 546 (58.0%) were women. The all-cause readmission rate was 12.3% (95% CI, 12.2%-12.4%), and the potentially preventable readmission rate was 5.3% (95% CI, 5.3%-5.4%). Across 1162 included IRFs, risk-standardized all-cause readmission rates ranged from 10.1% (95% CI, 8.9%-11.6%) to 15.9% (95% CI, 13.6-18.6%) and potentially preventable readmission rates ranged from 4.3% (95% CI, 3.7%-5.4%) to 7.3% (95% CI, 5.7%-8.3%). Using the All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities, 16 IRFs (1.4%) had 95% CIs above the national mean rate, 1137 IRFs (97.9%) had 95% CIs containing the national mean rate, and 9 IRFs (0.8%) had 95% CIs below the national mean rate. Using the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation, 8 IRFs (0.7%) had 95% CIs above the national mean rate, 1153 IRFs (99.2%) had 95% CIs containing the national mean rate, and 1 IRF (0.1%) had a 95% CI below the national mean rate., Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that readmission rates were lower when using the Potentially Preventable 30-Day Post-Discharge Readmission Measure for Inpatient Rehabilitation and further reduced discrimination between facilities compared with the recently discontinued All-Cause Unplanned Readmission Measure for 30 Days Post Discharge From Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities. This finding may indicate there is a lack of room for improvement in readmission rates. Given the rationale of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for removing measures that fail to discriminate quality performance, this suggests that the current readmission measure should not be implemented as part of the Inpatient Rehabilitation Quality Reporting Program.

Background: Cardiovascular disease including ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is increasing and the leading cause of death in China. There has been limited data available to characterize STEMI management and outcomes in rural areas of China. The Henan STEMI Registry is a regional STEMI project with the objectives to timely obtain real-world knowledge about STEMI patients in secondary and tertiary hospitals and to provide a platform for care quality improvement efforts in predominantly rural central China., Methods: The Henan STEMI Registry is a multicentre, prospective and observational study for STEMI patients. The registry includes 66 participating hospitals (50 secondary hospitals; 16 tertiary hospitals) that cover 15 prefectures and one city direct-controlled by the province in Henan province. Patients were consecutively enrolled with a primary diagnosis of STEMI within 30 days of symptom onset. Clinical treatments, outcomes and cost are collected by local investigators and captured electronically, with a standardized set of variables and standard definitions, and rigorous data quality control. Post-discharge patient follow-up to 1 year is planned. As of August 2018, the Henan STEMI Registry has enrolled 5479 patients of STEMI., Discussion: The Henan STEMI Registry represents the largest Chinese regional platform for clinical research and care quality improvement for STEMI. The board inclusion of secondary hospitals in Henan province will allow for the exploration of STEMI in predominantly rural central China., Trial Registration: [NCT02641262] [29 December, 2015].

Background: Despite widespread adoption of Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs), healthcare spending reductions have been modest. This may relate to variable participation in ACOs by specialist physicians, who disproportionately drive spending. To examine whether specialist participation in Medicare ACOs was associated with changes in healthcare spending and clinical quality, we analyzed national Medicare data., Methods and Results: Working with a 20% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries (2008 to 2015), we identified those with cardiovascular disease. We estimated linear regression models at the beneficiary-quarter level to evaluate changes in healthcare spending and clinical quality after the start of the Shared Savings Program in 2012. We then examined whether changes in spending and quality across ACOs were conditional on cardiologist participation. Our study included ≈1.6 million beneficiaries per year. Although the number of ACOs increased over the study period (from 114 in 2012 to 392 in 2015), the proportion with any cardiologist participation remained stable (from 80% in 2012 to 83% in 2015). Compared with unaligned beneficiaries, those cared for by ACOs without cardiologist participation were associated with a spending reduction (per quarter) of -$75 (95% CI, -$105 to -$46; P <0.001). Care receipt in an ACO with cardiologist participation was associated with an additional difference in spending of -$56 (95% CI, -$87 to -$25; P <0.001), driven by lower spending for skilled nursing facilities, evaluation and management services, procedural care, and testing. While heart failure admission rates were similar among aligned and unaligned beneficiaries, ACO care was associated with fewer all-cause readmissions ( P <0.001) and emergency department visits ( P <0.001). Rates of these outcomes did not vary by cardiologist participation., Conclusions: Annual spending for beneficiaries with cardiovascular disease was ≈$200 lower when cared for by ACOs with cardiologist participation (compared with those without). These spending reductions did not come at the expense of clinical quality.

Background: Quality improvement initiatives have been developed to improve acute coronary syndrome care largely in high-income country settings. We sought to synthesize the effect size and quality of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies for hospital-based acute coronary syndrome quality improvement interventions on clinical outcomes and process of care measures for their potential implementation in low- and middle-income country settings., Methods and Results: We conducted a bibliometric search of databases and trial registers and a hand search in 2016 and performed an updated search in May 2018 and May 2019. We performed data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and quality of evidence assessments in duplicate. We assessed differences in outcomes by study design comparing RCTs to nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies and by country income status. A meta-analysis was not feasible due to substantial, unexplained heterogeneity among the included studies, and thus, we present a qualitative synthesis. We screened 5858 records and included 32 studies (14 RCTs [n=109 763] and 18 nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies [n=54-423]). In-hospital mortality ranged from 2.1% to 4.8% in the intervention groups versus 3.3% to 5.1% in the control groups in 5 RCTs (n=55 942). Five RCTs (n=64 313) reported 3.0% to 31.0% higher rates of reperfusion for patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in the intervention groups. The effect sizes for in-hospital and discharge medical therapies in a majority of RCTs were 3.0% to 10.0% higher in the intervention groups. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality evaluated by 4 RCTs (n=42 384), which reported 2.5% to 15.0% versus 5.9% to 22% 30-day mortality rates in the intervention versus control groups. In contrast, nonrandomized quasi-experimental studies reported larger effect sizes compared to RCTs. There were no significant consistent differences in outcomes between high-income and middle-income countries. Low-income countries were not represented in any of the included studies., Conclusions: Hospital-based acute coronary syndrome quality improvement interventions have a modest effect on process of care measures but not on clinical outcomes with expected differences by study design. Although quality improvement programs have an ongoing and important role for acute coronary syndrome quality of care in high-income country settings, further research will help to identify key components for contextualizing and implementing such interventions to new settings to achieve their desired effects. Systematic Review Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/. Unique identifier: CRD42016047604.

Background The attitudes of Department of Veterans Affairs ( VA ) cardiovascular clinicians toward the VA 's quality-of-care processes, clinical outcomes measures, and healthcare value are not well understood. Methods and Results Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with cardiovascular healthcare providers (n=31) at VA hospitals that were previously identified as high or low performers in terms of healthcare value. The interviews focused on VA providers' experiences with measures of processes, outcomes, and value (ie, costs relative to outcomes) of cardiovascular care. Most providers were aware of process-of-care measurements, received regular feedback generated from those data, and used that feedback to change their practices. Fewer respondents reported clinical outcomes measures influencing their practice, and virtually no participants used value data to inform their practice, although several described administrative barriers limiting high-cost care. Providers also expressed general enthusiasm for the VA 's quality measurement/improvement efforts, with relatively few criticisms about the workload or opportunity costs inherent in clinical performance data collection. There were no material differences in the responses of employees of low-performing versus high-performing VA medical centers. Conclusions Regardless of their medical center's healthcare value performance, most VA cardiovascular providers used feedback from process-of-care data to inform their practice. However, clinical outcomes data were used more rarely, and value-of-care data were almost never used. The limited use of outcomes data to inform healthcare practice raises concern that healthcare outcomes may have insufficient influence, whereas the lack of value data influencing cardiovascular care practices may perpetuate inefficiencies in resource use.

Background The contemporary incidence of and reasons for early readmission after infective endocarditis ( IE ) are not well known. Therefore, we analyzed 30-day readmission demographics after IE from the US Nationwide Readmission Database. Methods and Results We examined the 2010 to 2014 Nationwide Readmission Database to identify index admissions for a primary diagnosis of IE with survival at discharge. Incidence, reasons, and independent predictors of 30-day unplanned readmissions were analyzed. In total, 11 217 patients (24.8%) were nonelectively readmitted within 30 days among the 45 214 index admissions discharged after IE . The most common causes of readmission were IE (20.5%), sepsis (8.7%), complications of device/graft (8.1%), and congestive heart failure (7.6%). In-hospital mortality and the valvular surgery rates during the readmissions were 8.1% and 9.1%, respectively. Discharge to home or self-care, undergoing valvular surgery, aged ≥60 years, and having private insurance were independently associated with lower rates of 30-day readmission. Length of stay of ≥10 days, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, renal failure, chronic pulmonary disease, peripheral artery disease, and depression were associated with higher risk. The total hospital costs of readmission were $48.7 million per year (median, $11 267; interquartile range, $6021-$25 073), which accounted for 38.6% of the total episodes of care (index+readmission). Conclusions Almost 1 in 4 patients was readmitted within 30 days of admission for IE . The most common reasons were IE , other infectious causes, and cardiac causes. A multidisciplinary approach to determine the surgical indications and close monitoring are necessary to improve outcomes and reduce complications in in-hospital and postdischarge settings.

Objectives: To estimate annual healthcare resource utilization and direct medical costs for patients with osteoporotic fractures in China., Methods: Data were obtained from the Tianjin Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance database (2008-2011). Included patients were 50 years or older with one or more diagnoses of osteoporotic fractures between 2009 and 2010. The annual healthcare resource utilization and direct medical costs were estimated. Regression model was applied to identify factors associated with the direct medical costs., Results: A total of 5941 patients were included (mean age, 65.9 years; women, 62.1%; retired, 88.2%). During the 12 months after a fracture, the annual mean all-cause cost was $2549 per patient. Osteoporosis-related costs accounted for 53.8% of the total costs; 92.0% of these costs were for inpatient services. For osteoporosis-related health services, 33.2% of the patients experienced at least 1 hospitalization, with a mean cost of $3010 per admission; 83.2% of the patients experienced at least 1 outpatient visit, with a mean cost of $18 per visit during the 12-month follow-up period. The regression model revealed that osteoporosis-related costs tended to increase with age, and patients with hip, vertebral, lower leg, and multiple fractures were more likely to have higher costs., Conclusions: Costs for patients with osteoporotic fractures were considerable in China, driven mainly by osteoporosis-related hospitalizations. Efforts focused on reducing the utilization of inpatient services by lowering the fracture risks may lighten the economic burden of osteoporotic fractures in China., (Copyright © 2019 ISPOR--The professional society for health economics and outcomes research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Healthcare expenditures in the United States continue to grow; to control costs, there has been a shift away from volume-focused care to value-based care. The incorporation of patient perspectives in the development of value-based healthcare is critical, yet research addressing this issue is limited. This study explores awareness and understanding of patients with cancer about the quality-adjusted life year (QALY), as well as their perspectives regarding the use of the QALY to measure value in healthcare., Methods: This cross-sectional study used survey methodology to explore patient awareness, understanding, and perspectives on the QALY. A total of 774 patients with cancer and survivors completed this survey in June and July of 2017. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted., Results: Results showed that there is limited awareness of the QALY among patients with cancer and survivors and minimal understanding of how the QALY is used. Only one quarter of respondents believed that the QALY was a good way to measure value in healthcare. Some participants (5%) stated that the QALY could be personally helpful to them in their own decision making, indicating the possible usefulness of the QALY as a decision aid in cancer care. Nevertheless, participants expressed concern about other decision makers using the QALY to allocate cancer care and resources and maintained a strong desire for autonomy over personal healthcare choices., Conclusions: Although participants believed that the QALY could help them make more informed decisions, there was concern about how it would be used by payers, policymakers, and other decision makers in determining access to care. Implications for policy and research are discussed., (Copyright © 2018 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Factors contributing to and causes of hospital readmissions have been investigated worldwide, but very few studies have been performed in South Africa (SA) and none in the Western Cape Province., Objectives: To investigate possible preventable and non-preventable factors contributing to readmissions to the Department of Internal Medicine at Tygerberg Hospital (TBH), Cape Town, within 30 days of hospital discharge. The researchers tested a risk-stratification tool (the LACE index) to evaluate the tool's performance in the TBH system., Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of all 30-day readmissions (initial hospitalisation and rehospitalisation within 30 days) to the Department of Internal Medicine at TBH for the period 1 January 2014 - 31 March 2015. Potential risk factors leading to readmission were recorded., Results: A total of 11 826 admissions were recorded. Of these patients, 1 242 were readmitted within 30 days, representing a readmission rate of 10.5%. The majority of patients (66%) were readmitted within 14 days after discharge. The most important risk factor for readmission was the number of comorbidities, assessed using the Charlston score. The study also identified a large burden of potentially avoidable causes (35% of readmissions) due to system-related issues, premature discharge being the most common. Other reasons for 30-day readmission were nosocomial infection, adverse drug reactions, especially warfarin toxicity, inadequate discharge planning and physician error., Conclusions: Despite TBH being a low-resource, high-turnover system, the 30-day readmission rate was calculated at 10.5%. Global readmission rates vary from 10% to 25%, depending on the reference article/source used. We found that 35% of 30-day readmissions were potentially avoidable. Venous thromboembolism was a minor contributor to readmission but was associated with a very high mortality rate. A secondary outcome evaluated was the utility of the LACE and modified LACE (mLACE) index in the TBH environment. The risk tool performed well in the TBH population, and a high LACE and mLACE score correlated with an increased risk of 30-day readmission (p&lt;0.001).

Cost-benefit analysis for quality measures has emerged as the cornerstone of CMS' Meaningful Measures initiative.

Background: The advent of value-based care, in which surgeons and hospitals accept more responsibility for clinical and financial results, has increased the focus on surgeon- and hospital-specific outcomes. However, methods to identify high-quality, low-cost surgeons are not well developed., Questions/purposes: (1) Is there an association between surgeon THA volume and 90-day Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Part A payments, readmissions, or mortality? (2) What proportion of THAs in the United States is performed by low- and high-volume surgeons?, Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the CMS Limited Data Set on all primary elective THAs performed in the United States (except Maryland) between January 2013 and June 2016 on patients insured by Medicare. This represented 409,844 THAs totaling more than USD 7.7 billion in direct CMS expenditures. Surgeons were divided into five groups based on annualized volume of CMS elective THAs over the study period. Using linear and logistic regression, we calculated and compared 90-day CMS Part A payments, readmissions, and mortality among the groups. For each episode, demographic information (age, sex, and race), geographic location, and Elixhauser comorbidities were calculated to control for major confounding factors in the regression., Results: When compared with the highest volume group, each lower volume group had increased payments, increased readmission rates, and increased mortality rates in a stepwise fashion when controlling for patient-specific variables including Elixhauser comorbidity index, demographic information, region, and background trend. The lowest volume group resulted in 27.2% more CMS payments per case (p < 0.001; 95% confidence interval [CI], 26.6%-27.8%), had an increased readmission odds ratio (OR) of 1.8 (p < 0.001; 95% CI, 1.7-1.9), and an increased mortality OR of 4.7 (p < 0.001; 95% CI, 4.0-5.5) when compared with the highest volume group. There was also variation within volume groups: some lower volume surgeons had lower payments, readmissions, and mortality than some higher volume surgeons despite the general trend. In terms of CMS volume, surgeons who were at least moderate volume (11+ annual cases) performed 78% of THAs and represented 26% of operating surgeons. The low- and lowest volume surgeons (10 or fewer annual cases) performed only 22% of THAs in the United States while representing 74% of unique operating surgeons., Conclusions: There is a strong association between a surgeon's Medicare volume and lower CMS payments, readmissions, and mortality. Furthermore, the majority of Medicare THAs in the United States are performed by surgeons who perform > 10 CMS operations annually. Compared with previous work, these results suggest a trend toward higher volume surgeons in the Medicare population. The results also suggest a benefit to the shift toward higher volume surgeons in reducing payments, readmissions, and mortality for elective THA in the United States. However, given that payments, readmission, and mortality of surgeons varied widely, it is important to note that available individual CMS data can be used to directly evaluate each individual surgeon based on their actual results well as through association with volume., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a common and expensive procedure that has become a target for bundled payment initiatives. We described the magnitude and determinants of variation in 90-day PCI episode payments across a diverse array of patients and hospitals., Methods and Results: We linked clinical registry data from PCIs performed at 33 Michigan hospitals to 90-day episodes of care constructed using Medicare fee-for-service and commercial insurance claims from January 2012 to October 2016. Payments were price standardized and risk adjusted using clinical and administrative variables in an observed-over-expected framework. Hospitals were stratified into quartiles based on average episode payments. Payment components between the highest and the lowest quartiles were compared with identified drivers of variation (ie, index hospitalization/procedure, readmissions, postacute care, and professional fees). Among 40 925 90-day PCI episodes, the average risk-adjusted 90-day episode payment by hospital ranged between $22 154 and $27 205 with a median of $24 696 (interquartile range, $24 190-$25 643). Hospitals in the lowest and the highest quartiles had average episode payments of $23 744 and $26 504, respectively (difference, $2760). Readmission payments were the primary driver of this variation (46.2%), followed by postacute care (22.6%). Readmissions remained the primary driver of variation in key subgroups, including inpatient and outpatient PCI, as well as PCI for acute myocardial infarction and nonacute myocardial infarction indications., Conclusions: Substantial hospital-level variation exists in 90-day PCI episode payments. Over half the variation between high- and low-payment hospitals was related to care after the index procedure, primarily because of readmissions and postacute care. Hospitals and policymakers should consider targeting these components when developing initiatives to reduce PCI-related spending.

This final rule updates the payment rates used under the prospective payment system (PPS) for skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) for fiscal year (FY) 2019. This final rule also replaces the existing case-mix classification methodology, the Resource Utilization Groups, Version IV (RUG–IV) model, with a revised case-mix methodology called the Patient- Driven Payment Model (PDPM) beginning on October 1, 2019. The rule finalizes revisions to the regulation text that describes a beneficiary's SNF "resident" status under the consolidated billing provision and the required content of the SNF level of care certification. The rule also finalizes updates to the SNF Quality Reporting Program (QRP) and the Skilled Nursing Facility Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program.

This final rule updates the prospective payment rates for Medicare inpatient hospital services provided by inpatient psychiatric facilities (IPFs), which include psychiatric hospitals and excluded psychiatric units of an acute care hospital or critical access hospital. These changes are effective for IPF discharges occurring during the fiscal year (FY) beginning October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019 (FY 2019). This final rule also updates the IPF labor-related share, the IPF wage index for FY 2019, and the International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD- 10-CM) codes for FY 2019. It also makes technical corrections to the IPF regulations, and updates quality measures and reporting requirements under the Inpatient Psychiatric Facility Quality Reporting (IPFQR) Program. In addition, it updates providers on the status of IPF PPS refinements.

This final rule updates the hospice wage index, payment rates, and cap amount for fiscal year (FY) 2019. The rule also makes conforming regulations text changes to recognize physician assistants as designated hospice attending physicians effective January 1, 2019. Finally, the rule includes changes to the Hospice Quality Reporting Program.

This final rule updates the prospective payment rates for inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) for federal fiscal year (FY) 2019. As required by the Social Security Act (the Act), this final rule includes the classification and weighting factors for the IRF prospective payment system's (PPS) case-mix groups and a description of the methodologies and data used in computing the prospective payment rates for FY 2019. This final rule also alleviates administrative burden for IRFs by removing the Functional Independence Measure (FIM\TM\) instrument and associated Function Modifiers from the IRF Patient Assessment Instrument (IRF-PAI) beginning in FY 2020 and revises certain IRF coverage requirements to reduce the amount of required paperwork in the IRF setting beginning in FY 2019. Additionally, this final rule incorporates certain data items located in the Quality Indicators section of the IRF-PAI into the IRF case-mix classification system using analysis of 2 years of data beginning in FY 2020. For the IRF Quality Reporting Program (QRP), this final rule adopts a new measure removal factor, removes two measures from the IRF QRP measure set, and codifies a number of program requirements in our regulations.