Search

Objective: To establish a methodological approach to compare two high‐need, high‐cost (HNHC) patient personas internationally. Data sources: Linked individual‐level administrative data from the inpatient and outpatient sectors compiled by the International Collaborative on Costs, Outcomes, and Needs in Care (ICCONIC) across 11 countries: Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. Study design: We outline a methodological approach to identify HNHC patient types for international comparisons that reflect complex, priority populations defined by the National Academy of Medicine. We define two patient profiles using accessible patient‐level datasets linked across different domains of care—hospital care, primary care, outpatient specialty care, post‐acute rehabilitative care, long‐term care, home‐health care, and outpatient drugs. The personas include a frail older adult with a hip fracture with subsequent hip replacement and an older person with complex multimorbidity, including heart failure and diabetes. We demonstrate their comparability by examining the characteristics and clinical diagnoses captured across countries. Data collection/extraction methods: Data collected by ICCONIC partners. Principal findings: Across 11 countries, the identification of HNHC patient personas was feasible to examine variations in healthcare utilization, spending, and patient outcomes. The ability of countries to examine linked, individual‐level data varied, with the Netherlands, Canada, and Germany able to comprehensively examine care across all seven domains, whereas other countries such as England, Switzerland, and New Zealand were more limited. All countries were able to identify a hip fracture persona and a heart failure persona. Patient characteristics were reassuringly similar across countries. Conclusion: Although there are cross‐country differences in the availability and structure of data sources, countries had the ability to effectively identify comparable HNHC personas for international study. This work serves as the methodological paper for six accompanying papers examining differences in spending, utilization, and outcomes for these personas across countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the context of limited evidence to date that national health care quality improvement (QI) initiatives are effective, this Viewpoint proposes shifting the focus of QI efforts to high-need, high-cost individuals, such as frail older patients and those at the end of life, because they are especially vulnerable to adverse consequences of low-value, high-cost care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Racial disparities in hospitalization rates for ambulatory caresensitive conditions are concerning and may signal differential access to high-quality ambulatory care. Whether racial disparities are improving as a result of better ambulatory care versus artificially narrowing because of increased use of observation status is unclear. Using Medicare data for 2011-15, we sought to determine whether black-white disparities in avoidable hospitalizations were improving and evaluated the degree to which changes in observations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions may be contributing to changes in these gaps. We found that while the racial gap in avoidable hospitalizations due to such conditions has decreased, that seems to be explained by a concomitant increase in the gap of avoidable observation stays. This suggests that changes from inpatient admissions to observation status seem to be driving the reduction in racial disparities in avoidable hospitalizations, rather than changes in the ambulatory setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An increasingly older population of people with HIV raises concerns about how HIV may influence care for Medicare patients. We therefore sought to determine the extent to which HIV influences additional spending on and use of mental health and medical care among Medicare beneficiaries and, importantly, whether treatment with antiretroviral therapy may reduce this additional spending. Using 2016 Medicare claims, we compared risk-adjusted spending and utilization for Medicare beneficiaries with and without HIV, as well as subgroups of people receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART).Compared to beneficiaries without HIV, those with HIV receiving ART incurred 220.6 percent more spending, mostly driven by ART spending, whereas those with HIV not receiving ART incurred 95.4 percent more spending. Among beneficiaries with HIV, those receiving more months of ART had lower spending on treatment for other chronic conditions relative to those receiving fewer months of ART in a dose-response manner. Beneficiaries with HIV not receiving ART incurred the highest spending related to infections, mental health disorders, and other medical conditions compared to beneficiaries in other HIV subgroups receiving ART for various numbers of months. Our findings suggest that ART may be associated with Medicare Parts A and B savings, but ART adherence and the high prices of HIV drugs in Part D need to be addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]