Changes in Hospital-acquired Conditions and Mortality Associated With the Hospital-acquired Condition Reduction Program.

IMPORTANCE: To improve patient safety, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) in August 2013. The program reduces Medicare payments by 1% for hospitals in the lowest performance quartile related to hospital-acquired conditions. Performance measures are focused on perioperative care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in HACs and 30-day mortality after the announcement of the HACRP. DESIGN: Interrupted time-series design using Medicare Provider and Analysis Review (MEDPAR) claims data. We estimated models with linear splines to test for changes in HACs and 30-day mortality before the Affordable Care Act (ACA), after the ACA, and after the HACRP. SETTING: Fee-for-service Medicare 2009-2015. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries undergoing surgery and discharged from an acute care hospital between January 2009 and August 2015 (N = 8,857,877). MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Changes in HACs and 30-day mortality after the announcement of the HACRP. RESULTS: Patients experienced HACs at a rate of 13.39 per 1000 discharges [95% confidence interval (CI), 13.10 to 13.68] in the pre-ACA period. This declined after the ACA was passed and declined further after the HACRP announcement [adjusted difference in annual slope, -1.34 (95% CI, -1.64 to -1.04)]. Adjusted 30-day mortality was 3.69 (95% CI, 3.64 to 3.74) in the pre-ACA period among patients receiving surgery. Thirty-day mortality continued to decline after the ACA [adjusted annual slope -0.04 (95% CI, -0.05 to -0.02)] but was flat after the HACRP [adjusted annual slope -0.01 (95% CI, -0.04 to 0.02)]. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although hospital-acquired conditions targeted under the HACRP declined at a greater rate after the program was announced, 30-day mortality was unchanged.

A Comparison of Estimated Cost Savings from Potential Reductions in Hospital-Acquired Conditions to Levied Penalties Under the CMS Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program.

BACKGROUND: The Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reduces Medicare payments to hospitals with high rates of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) by 1% each year. It is not known how the savings accruing to CMS from such penalties compare to savings resulting from a reduction in HACs driven by this program. This study compares the reported savings to CMS from financial penalties levied under the HACRP with savings resulting from potential reductions in HACs. METHODS: Using a random sample of 20% of Medicare claims data (January 1, 2009-September 30, 2014), the research team evaluated the association between HACs and 90-day episode spending (adjusted to 2015 dollars), then estimated potential annual savings to CMS if there was a relative decrease in incidence of all HACs by 1%-20%. These savings were then compared to the actual collected HACRP penalties reported by CMS in 2015. RESULTS: All HACs were associated with significant increases in total 90-day episode spending, ranging from $3,183 for iatrogenic pneumothorax to $21,654 for postoperative hip fracture. The total estimated savings to Medicare from potential reduction in all HACs ranged from $2.2 million to $44 million per year, an amount much lower than the $361 million in penalties levied on hospitals per year for HACs. CONCLUSION: The penalties levied under the HACRP far exceed the potential cost savings accruing from a 1%-20% reduction in HACs that might result from hospitals' efforts in response to the program.

Changes in Coverage, Access, and Health Following Implementation of Healthy Behavior Incentive Medicaid Expansions vs. Traditional Medicaid Expansions.

BACKGROUND: Several states expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act using Section 1115 waivers to implement healthy behavior incentive (HBI) programs, but the impact of this type of expansion relative to traditional expansion is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether Medicaid expansion with healthy behavior incentive programs and traditional Medicaid expansion were associated with differential changes in coverage, access, and self-rated health outcomes among low-income adults. DESIGN: Difference-in-differences analysis of American Community Survey and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 2011 to 2017. PARTICIPANTS: Low-income adults ages 19-64 in the Midwest Census region (American Community Survey, n = 665,653; Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, n = 71,959). INTERVENTIONS: Exposure to either HBI waiver or traditional Medicaid expansion in the state of residence. MAIN MEASURES: Coverage: Medicaid, private, or any health insurance coverage; access: routine checkup, personal doctor, delaying care due to cost; health: cancer screening, preventive care, healthy behaviors, self-reported health. KEY RESULTS: Healthy behavior incentive (HBI) and traditional expansion (TE) states experienced reductions in uninsurance (- 5.6 [- 7.5, - 3.7] and - 6.2 [- 8.1, - 4.4] percentage points, respectively) and gains in Medicaid (HBI, + 7.6 [2.4, 12.8]; TE, + 9.7 [5.9, 13.4] percentage points) relative to non-expansion states. Both expansion types were associated with increases in rates of having a personal doctor (HBI, + 3.8 [2.0, 5.6]; TE, + 5.9 [2.2, 9.6] percentage points) and mammography (HBI, + 5.6 [0.6, 10.6]; TE, + 7.3 [0.7, 13.9] percentage points). Meanwhile, checkups increased more in HBI than in TE states (p < 0.01), but no other changes in health care services differed between expansion types. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion was associated with improvements in coverage and access to care with few differences between expansion types.

Diagnosis and Care of Chronic Health Conditions Among Medicaid Expansion Enrollees: a Mixed-Methods Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain how Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act influences the diagnosis of chronic health conditions, and the care and health of enrollees with chronic conditions. OBJECTIVE: Describe the prevalence of new and pre-existing chronic health conditions among Medicaid expansion enrollees. Examine whether perceived changes in specific types of access and self-rated health status differed between enrollees with chronic conditions and those without. Examine how gaining Medicaid coverage affected chronic disease management and well-being. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study including a telephone survey and semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Michigan's Medicaid expansion, the "Healthy Michigan Plan" (HMP). PARTICIPANTS: 4090 survey respondents (response rate 54%) with ≥ 12 months HMP enrollment and 67 interviewees with ≥ 6 months enrollment. MAIN MEASURES: Self-reported chronic condition diagnoses, changes in physical/mental health, and healthcare access. Descriptive survey data were adjusted for survey design and nonresponse. Semi-structured interview questions about how gaining HMP coverage led to changes in health status. KEY RESULTS: Among enrollees, 68% had a self-reported diagnosis of a chronic health condition; 42% of those were newly diagnosed since HMP enrollment. In multivariable models, enrollees with chronic conditions were significantly more likely to report improved physical (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.70, 95% CI (1.40, 2.07)) and mental health (aOR 1.75, (1.43, 2.15)) since HMP enrollment than enrollees without chronic conditions. Among enrollees with chronic conditions, the strongest predictors of improvements in health were having seen a primary care physician, improved mental health care access, and improved medication access. Interviewees with chronic conditions described how increased access to health care led to improvements in both physical and mental health. CONCLUSIONS: Enrollees with expanded Medicaid coverage commonly reported detection of previously undiagnosed chronic conditions. Perceived health status and access improved more often among enrollees with chronic health conditions. Improved access was associated with improved physical and mental health among this vulnerable group.

Changes in hospital safety following penalties in the US Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between hospital penalization in the US Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) and subsequent changes in clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Regression discontinuity design applied to a retrospective cohort from inpatient Medicare claims. SETTING: 3238 acute care hospitals in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries discharged from acute care hospitals between 23 July 2014 and 30 November 2016 and eligible for at least one targeted hospital acquired condition (n=15 470 334). INTERVENTION: Hospital receipt of a penalty in the first year of the HACRP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Episode level count of targeted hospital acquired conditions per 1000 episodes, 30 day readmissions, and 30 day mortality. RESULTS: Of 724 hospitals penalized under the HACRP in fiscal year 2015, 708 were represented in the study. Mean counts of hospital acquired conditions were 2.72 per 1000 episodes for penalized hospitals and 2.06 per 1000 episodes for non-penalized hospitals; 30 day readmissions were 14.4% and 14.0%, respectively, and 30 day mortality was 9.0% for both hospital groups. Penalized hospitals were more likely to be large, teaching institutions, and have a greater share of patients with low socioeconomic status than non-penalized hospitals. HACRP penalties were associated with a non-significant change of -0.16 hospital acquired conditions per 1000 episodes (95% confidence interval -0.53 to 0.20), -0.36 percentage points in 30 day readmission (-1.06 to 0.33), and -0.04 percentage points in 30 day mortality (-0.59 to 0.52). No clear patterns of clinical improvement were observed across hospital characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Penalization was not associated with significant changes in rates of hospital acquired conditions, 30 day readmission, or 30 day mortality, and does not appear to drive meaningful clinical improvements. By disproportionately penalizing hospitals caring for more disadvantaged patients, the HACRP could exacerbate inequities in care.

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of pay-for-performance in primary care in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Introduced in 2004, the United Kingdom's (UK) Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) is the world's largest primary-care pay-for-performance programme. Given some evidence of the benefits and the substantial costs associated with the QOF, it remains unclear whether the programme is cost-effective. Therefore, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of continuing versus stopping the QOF. METHODS: We developed a lifetime simulation model to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs for a UK population cohort aged 40-74 years (n = 27,070,862) exposed to the QOF and for a counterfactual scenario without exposure. Based on a previous retrospective cross-country analysis using data from 1994 to 2010, we assumed the benefits of the QOF to be a change in age-adjusted mortality of -3.68 per 100,000 population (95% confidence interval -8.16 to 0.80). We used cost-effectiveness thresholds of £30,000/QALY, £20,000/QALY and £13,000/QALY to determine the optimal strategy in base-case and sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, continuing the QOF increased population-level QALYs and health-care costs yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £49,362/QALY. The ICER remained >£30,000/QALY in scenarios with and without non-fatal outcomes or increased drug costs, and under differing assumptions about the duration of QOF benefit following its hypothetical discontinuation. The ICER for continuing the programme fell below £30,000/QALY when QOF incentive payments were 36% lower (while preserving QOF mortality benefits), and in scenarios where the QOF resulted in substantial reductions in health-care spending or non-fatal cardiovascular disease events. Continuing the QOF was cost-effective in 18%, 3% and 0% of probabilistic sensitivity analysis iterations using thresholds of £30,000/QALY, £20,000/QALY and £13,000/QALY, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to stopping the QOF and returning all associated incentive payments to the National Health Service, continuing the QOF is not cost-effective. To improve population health efficiently, the UK should redesign the QOF or pursue alternative interventions.

Geographic Variation in Medicaid Acceptance Across Michigan Primary Care Practices in the Era of the Affordable Care Act.

Coverage and access have improved under the Affordable Care Act, yet it is unclear whether recent gains have reached those regions within states that were most in need of improved access to care. We examined geographic variation in Medicaid acceptance among Michigan primary care practices before and after Medicaid expansion in the state, using data from a simulated patient study of primary care practices. We used logistic regression analysis with time indicators to assess regional changes in Medicaid acceptance over time. Geographic regions with lower baseline (<50%) Medicaid acceptance had significant increases in Medicaid acceptance at 4 and 8 months post-expansion, while regions with higher baseline (≥50%) Medicaid acceptance did not experience significant changes in Medicaid acceptance. As state Medicaid expansions continue to be implemented across the country, policy makers should consider the local dynamics of incentives for provider participation in Medicaid.

Lessons from early Medicaid expansions under health reform: interviews with Medicaid officials.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) dramatically expands Medicaid in 2014 in participating states. Meanwhile, six states have already expanded Medicaid since 2010 to some or all of the low-income adults targeted under health reform. We undertook an in-depth exploration of these six "early-expander" states-California, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Washington-through interviews with high-ranking Medicaid officials. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 high-ranking Medicaid officials in six states and analyzed the interviews using qualitative methods. Interviews explored enrollment outreach, stakeholder involvement, impact on beneficiaries, utilization and costs, implementation challenges, and potential lessons for 2014. Two investigators independently analyzed interview transcripts and iteratively refined the codebook until reaching consensus. RESULTS: We identified several themes. First, these expansions built upon pre-existing state-funded insurance programs for the poor. Second, predictions about costs and enrollment were challenging, indicating the uncertainty in projections for 2014. Other themes included greater than anticipated need for behavioral health services in the expansion population, administrative challenges of expansions, and persistent barriers to enrollment and access after expanding eligibility-though officials overall felt the expansions increased access for beneficiaries. Finally, political context-support or opposition from stakeholders and voters-plays a critical role in shaping the success of Medicaid expansions. CONCLUSIONS: Early Medicaid expansions under the ACA offer important lessons to federal and state policymakers as the 2014 expansions approach. While the context of each state's expansion is unique, key shared experiences were significant implementation challenges and opportunities for expanding access to needed services.