Excess mortality following hip fracture: the role of underlying health status.

UNLABELLED: We evaluated the long-term excess mortality associated with hip fracture, using prospectively collected data on pre-fracture health and function from a nationally representative sample of U.S. elders. Although mortality was elevated for the first six months following hip fracture, we found no evidence of long-term excess mortality. INTRODUCTION: The long-term excess mortality associated with hip fracture remains controversial. METHODS: To assess the association between hip fracture and mortality, we used prospectively collected data on pre-fracture health and function from a representative sample of U.S. elders in the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) to perform survival analyses with time-varying covariates. RESULTS: Among 25,178 MCBS participants followed for a median duration of 3.8 years, 730 sustained a hip fracture during follow-up. Both early (within 6 months) and subsequent mortality showed significant elevations in models adjusted only for age, sex and race. With additional adjustment for pre-fracture health status, functional impairments, comorbid conditions and socioeconomic status, however, increased mortality was limited to the first six months after fracture (hazard ratio [HR]: 6.28, 95% CI: 4.82, 8.19). No increased mortality was evident during subsequent follow-up (HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.88, 1.23). Hip-fracture-attributable population mortality ranged from 0.5% at age 65 among men to 6% at age 85 among women. CONCLUSIONS: Hip fracture was associated with substantially increased mortality, but much of the short-term risk and all of the long-term risk was explained by the greater frailty of those experiencing hip fracture.

The burden of prevention: downstream consequences of Pap smear testing in the elderly.

CONTEXT: Although cervical cancer is an unusual cause of death among women 65 and older, most elderly women in the US report continuing to undergo periodic Pap smear screening. OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence of Pap smears and downstream testing among elderly women. SETTING: Claims-based analysis of female Medicare enrollees age 65 and older. METHODS: Using three years of Medicare Part B 5% Files (1995-1997), we differentiated between women undergoing screening Pap smears and those undergoing Pap smears for surveillance of previous abnormalities or Pap smear follow-up. We determined the proportion of elderly women undergoing Pap smear testing and rates of downstream testing and procedures after an initial Pap smear. RESULTS: Four million female Medicare beneficiaries over 65 years underwent Pap smear testing between 1995 and 1997, representing 25% of the eligible population. After adjusting for underbilling for Pap smears under Medicare, 43% of women over 65 are estimated to have undergone Pap smear testing during the 3-year period. The large majority (90%) of Pap smears were for screening, while 10% were done for surveillance or follow-up. For every 1000 women with a screening Pap smear, 39 had at least one downstream intervention within eight months of the initial Pap smear, including seven women who underwent colposcopy and two women who had other surgical procedures. Rates of downstream interventions were considerably higher for women undergoing Pap smear follow-up (302 per 1000 with at least one downstream intervention), and surveillance of previous abnormalities (209 per 1000 with a downstream intervention). CONCLUSION: Cervical cancer screening is widespread among elderly American women, and follow-up testing is not uncommon, particularly among the ten percent of women who appear to be in a cycle of repeated testing. This substantial volume of testing occurs despite the rarity of cervical cancer deaths and unknown benefits of screening in this age group.

The development of a survey instrument for community health improvement.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a survey instrument that could be used both to guide and evaluate community health improvement efforts. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: A randomized telephone survey was administered to a sample of about 250 residents in two communities in Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania in the fall of 1997. METHODS: The survey instrument was developed by health professionals representing diverse health care organizations. This group worked collaboratively over a period of two years to (1) select a conceptual model of health as a foundation for the survey; (2) review relevant literature to identify indicators that adequately measured the health constructs within the chosen model; (3) develop new indicators where important constructs lacked specific measures; and (4) pilot test the final survey to assess the reliability and validity of the instrument. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The Evans and Stoddart Field Model of the Determinants of Health and Well-Being was chosen as the conceptual model within which to develop the survey. The Field Model depicts nine domains important to the origins and production of health and provides a comprehensive framework from which to launch community health improvement efforts. From more than 500 potential indicators we identified 118 survey questions that reflected the multiple determinants of health as conceptualized by this model. Sources from which indicators were selected include the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance Survey, the National Health Interview Survey, the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Survey, and the SF-12 Summary Scales. The work group developed 27 new survey questions for constructs for which we could not locate adequate indicators. Twenty-five questions in the final instrument can be compared to nationally published norms or benchmarks. The final instrument was pilot tested in 1997 in two communities. Administration time averaged 22 minutes with a response rate of 66 percent. Reliability of new survey questions was adequate. Face validity was supported by previous findings from qualitative and quantitative studies. CONCLUSIONS: We developed, pilot tested, and validated a survey instrument designed to provide more comprehensive and timely data to communities for community health assessments. This instrument allows communities to identify and measure critical domains of health that have previously not been captured in a single instrument.

The uneven landscape of newborn intensive care services: variation in the neonatology workforce.

CONTEXT: In the past 30 years, the number of neonatologists has increased while total births have remained nearly constant. It is not known how equitably this expanded workforce is distributed. OBJECTIVE: To determine the geographic distribution of neonatologists in the United States. DATA SOURCES: 1996 American Medical Association physician masterfiles; 1999 survey of all U.S. neonatal intensive care units; 1995 American Hospital Association hospital survey; and 1995 U.S. vital records. MEASURES: The number of neonatologists and neonatal mid-level providers per live birth within 246 market-based regions. RESULTS: The neonatology workforce varied substantially across neonatal intensive care regions. The number of neonatologists per 10,000 live births ranged from 1.2 to 25.6 with an interquintile range of 3.5 to 8.5. The weakly positive correlation between neonatologists and neonatal mid-level providers per live birth is not consistent with substitution of neonatal mid-level providers for neonatologists (Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, 0.17; P < 0.01). There was no difference in the percentage of neonatal fellows in the lowest and highest workforce quintile (14% vs. 16%) or in the percentage of neonatologists engaged predominantly in research, teaching, or administration (14% in lowest and highest quintiles). CONCLUSIONS: The regional supply of neonatologists varies dramatically and cannot be explained by the substitution of neonatal mid-level providers or by the presence of academic medical centers. Further research is warranted to understand whether neonatal intensive care resources are located in accordance with risk and whether more resources improve newborn outcomes.

Hospice use in Medicare managed care and fee-for-service systems.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether patterns of hospice use by older Medicare beneficiaries are consistent with the differing financial incentives in Medicare managed care (MC) and fee-for-service (FFS) settings. Specifically, are use patterns consistent with incentives that might encourage hospice use for MC enrollees and discourage hospice use for FFS enrollees? STUDY DESIGN: One-year study of hospice use by Medicare beneficiaries dying in 1996. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medicare enrollment and hospice administrative data were used to examine hospice use before death for all elderly individuals residing in 100 US counties with high MC enrollment in 1996. Age-, sex-, and race-adjusted rate of hospice use and length of stay in hospice are compared between FFS and MC enrollees across and within (when possible) the 100 counties. RESULTS: Rates of hospice use were significantly higher for MC enrollees than for FFS enrollees (26.6 vs 17.0 per 100 deaths; P < .001). These differences persisted within age, sex, and race groups but were not related to area MC enrollment rate or the amount of money paid to managed care organizations. Age-, sex-, and race-adjusted differences were observed in 94 of 100 counties. Length of stay in hospice was marginally longer for MC enrollees than for FFS enrollees (median, 24 vs 21 days; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: System of care is an important determinant of hospice use in the elderly Medicare population.

Are neonatal intensive care resources located according to need? Regional variation in neonatologists, beds, and low birth weight newborns.

OBJECTIVE: Despite marked growth in neonatal intensive care during the past 30 years, it is not known if neonatologists and beds are preferentially located in regions with greater newborn risk. This study reports the relationship between regional measures of intensive care capacity and low birth weight infants using newly developed market-based regions of neonatal intensive care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional small-area analysis of 246 neonatal intensive care regions (NICRs). DATA SOURCES: 1996 American Medical Association and American Osteopathic Association masterfiles data of clinically active neonatologists; 1999 American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Perinatal Pediatrics survey of directors of neonatal intensive care units in the United States with 100% response rate; 1995 linked birth/death data. RESULTS: The number of total births per neonatologist across NICRs ranged from 390 to 8197 (median: 1722) and the number of total births per intensive care bed ranged from 72 to 1319 (median: 317). The associations between capacity measures and low birth weight rates across NICRs were statistically significant but negligible (R(2): 0.04 for neonatologists; 0.05 for beds). NICRs in the quintile with the greatest neonatologist capacity (average of only 863 births per neonatologist) had very low birth weight (VLBW) rates of 1.5% while those in the quintile of lowest neonatologist capacity (average of 3718 births per neonatologist) had VLBW rates of 1.3%; a similar lack of meaningful difference in VLBW rates was noted across quintiles of intensive care bed capacity. Including midlevel providers and intermediate care beds to the analyses did not alter the findings. CONCLUSIONS: Neonatal intensive care capacity is not preferentially located in regions with greater newborn need as measured by low birth weight rates. Whether greater capacity affords benefits to the newborns remains unknown.

Associations among hospital capacity, utilization, and mortality of US Medicare beneficiaries, controlling for sociodemographic factors.

OBJECTIVE: To explore whether geographic variations in Medicare hospital utilization rates are due to differences in local hospital capacity, after controlling for socioeconomic status and disease burden, and to determine whether greater hospital capacity is associated with lower Medicare mortality rates. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: The study population: a 20 percent sample of 1989 Medicare enrollees. Measures of resources were based on a national small area analysis of 313 Hospital Referral Regions (HRR). Demographic and socioeconomic data were obtained from the 1990 U.S. Census. Measures of local disease burden were developed using Medicare claims files. STUDY DESIGN: The study was a cross-sectional analysis of the relationship between per capita measures of hospital resources in each region and hospital utilization and mortality rates among Medicare enrollees. Regression techniques were used to control for differences in sociodemographic characteristics and disease burden across areas. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Data on the study population were obtained from Medicare enrollment (Denominator File) and hospital claims files (MedPAR) and U.S. Census files. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The per capita supply of hospital beds varied by more than twofold across U.S. regions. Residents of areas with more beds were up to 30 percent more likely to be hospitalized, controlling for ecologic measures of socioeconomic characteristics and disease burden. A greater proportion of the population was hospitalized at least once during the year in areas with more beds; death was also more likely to take place in an inpatient setting. All effects were consistent across racial and income groups. Residence in areas with greater levels of hospital resources was not associated with a decreased risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: Residence in areas of greater hospital capacity is associated with substantially increased use of the hospital, even after controlling for socioeconomic characteristics and illness burden. This increased use provides no detectable mortality benefit.

How well does a single question about health predict the financial health of Medicare managed care plans?

CONTEXT: Responses to simple questions that predict subsequent health care utilization are of interest to both capitated health plans and the payer. OBJECTIVE: To determine how responses to a single question about general health status predict subsequent health care expenditures. DESIGN: Participants in the 1992 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey were asked the following question: "In general, compared to other people your age, would you say your health is: excellent, very good, good, fair or poor?" To obtain each participant's total Medicare expenditures and number of hospitalizations in the ensuing year, we linked the responses to this question with data from the 1993 Medicare Continuous History Survey. SAMPLE: Nationally representative sample of 8775 noninstitutionalized Medicare beneficiaries 65 years of age and older. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Annual age- and sex-adjusted Medicare expenditures and hospitalization rates. RESULTS: Eighteen percent of the beneficiaries rated their health as excellent, 56% rated it as very good or good, 17% rated it as fair, and 7% rated it as poor. Medicare expenditures had a marked inverse relation to self-assessed health ratings. In the year after assessment, age- and sex-adjusted annual expenditures varied fivefold, from $8743 for beneficiaries rating their health as poor to $1656 for beneficiaries rating their health as excellent. Hospitalization rates followed the same pattern: Respondents who rated their health as poor had 675 hospitalizations per 1000 beneficiaries per year compared with 136 per 1000 for those rating their health as excellent. CONCLUSIONS: The response to a single question about general health status strongly predicts subsequent health care utilization. Self-reports of fair or poor health identify a group of high-risk patients who may benefit from targeted interventions. Because the current Medicare capitation formula does not account for health status, health plans can maximize profits by disproportionately enrolling beneficiaries who judge their health to be good. However, they are at a competitive disadvantage if they enroll beneficiaries who view themselves as sick.

The association between for-profit hospital ownership and increased Medicare spending.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: The rate of conversion to for-profit ownership of hospitals has recently increased in the United States, with uncertain implications for health care costs. We compared total per capita Medicare spending in areas served by for-profit and not-for-profit hospitals. We used American Hospital Association data to categorize U.S. hospital service areas as for-profit (meaning that all beds in the area were in for-profit hospitals), not-for-profit (all beds were in not-for-profit hospitals), or mixed in 1989, 1992, and 1995. We then used data from the Continuous Medicare History Sample to calculate the 1989, 1992, and 1995 spending rates in each area, adjusting for other characteristics known to influence spending: age, sex, race, region of the United States, percentage of population living in urban areas, Medicare mortality rate, number of hospitals, number of physicians per capita, percentage of beds in hospitals affiliated with medical schools, percentage of beds in hospitals belonging to hospital chains, and percentage of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in health maintenance organizations. RESULTS: Adjusted total per capita Medicare spending in the 208 areas where all hospitals remained under for-profit ownership during the study years was greater than in the 2860 areas where all hospitals remained under not-for-profit ownership ($4,006 vs. $3,554 in 1989, $4,243 vs. $3,841 in 1992, and $5,172 vs. $4,440 in 1995; P<0.001 for each comparison). Mixed areas had intermediate spending rates. Spending in for-profit areas was greater than in not-for-profit areas in each category of service examined: hospital services, physicians' services, home health care, and services at other facilities. The greatest increases in per capita spending between 1989 and 1995 were for hospital services (a mean increase of $395 in for-profit areas and $283 in not-for-profit areas, P=0.03 for the comparison between for-profit and not-for-profit areas) and home health care (an increase of $457 in for-profit areas and $324 in not-for-profit areas, P<0.001). Between 1989 and 1995, spending in the 33 areas where all hospitals converted from not-for-profit to for-profit ownership grew more rapidly than in the 2860 areas where all hospitals remained under not-for-profit ownership ($1,295 vs. $866, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Both the rates of per capita Medicare spending and the increases in spending rates were greater in areas served by for-profit hospitals than in areas served by not-for-profit hospitals.

Capitation among Medicare beneficiaries.

CONTEXT: The Medicare program has promoted capitation as a way to contain costs. About 15% of Medicare beneficiaries nationwide are currently under capitation, but tremendous regional variation exists. PRACTICE PATTERN EXAMINED: The proportion of Medicare beneficiaries who have enrolled in risk-contract plans in individual states and in the 25 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. DATA SOURCE: Health Care Financing Administration data files. RESULTS: Medicare beneficiaries are most likely to be under capitation in Arizona (38%) and California (37%). Eight other states have capitation rates greater than 20%: Colorado, Florida, Rhode Island, Oregon, Washington, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Nevada. Thirty states, largely in the Great Plains area and the southern United States, have capitation rates less than 10%. Four major metropolitan areas have market penetration rates greater than 40%: San Bernardino, California; San Diego, California; Phoenix, Arizona; and Miami, Florida. Little penetration exists outside of metropolitan areas. CONCLUSION: Capitation in Medicare is a regional and predominantly an urban phenomenon.

When should this patient be seen again?

CONTEXT: The decision about when to ask a patient to return to the clinic for his or her next visit is common to all outpatient encounters in longitudinal care. It directly affects provider workloads and has a potentially great impact on health care costs and outcomes. GENERAL QUESTION: What are the effects of lengthening or shortening revisit intervals (the recommended period between one visit and the next) on health status and health care costs? SPECIFIC RESEARCH CHALLENGE: How can we change the average revisit interval while preserving provider input for individual patients? PROPOSED APPROACH: Patients could be randomly assigned to either short or long revisit intervals. So that provider input would be preserved, providers would select from among three discrete categories of revisit intervals: near-term (1 to 2 months); intermediate-term (2 to 4 months); and long-term (4 to 8 months). On the basis of randomization, patients would receive appointments at either the lower or the upper bound of the category selected. POTENTIAL DIFFICULTIES: Because blinding would be almost impossible, providers might "game" randomization at subsequent visits. ALTERNATE APPROACHES: A comparison of shorter and longer revisit intervals might be achieved with less direct approaches. In one such approach, patients would be randomly assigned to 1) having an appointment made immediately after the initial visit or 2) calling back for an appointment according to the interval recommended by the provider. In another approach, patient panel size would be held constant and providers would be randomly assigned to either an increased or a reduced number of clinic sessions.

Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Reports of better results at national referral centers than at low-volume community hospitals have prompted calls for regionalizing pancreaticoduodenectomy (the Whipple procedure). We examined the relationship between hospital volume and mortality with this procedure across all US hospitals. METHODS: Using information from the Medicare claims database, we performed a national cohort study of 7229 Medicare patients more than 65 years old undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy between 1992 and 1995. We divided the study population into approximate quartiles according to the hospital's average annual volume of pancreaticoduodenectomies in Medicare patients: very low (< 1/y), low (1-2/y), medium (2-5/y), and high (5+/y). Using multivariate logistic regression to account for potentially confounding patient characteristics, we examined the association between institutional volume and in-hospital mortality, our primary outcome measure. RESULTS: More than 50% of Medicare patients a undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy received care at hospitals performing fewer than 2 such procedures per year. In-hospital mortality rates at these low- and very-low-volume hospitals were 3- to 4-fold higher than at high-volume hospitals (12% and 16%, respectively, vs 4%, P < .001). Within the high-volume quartile, the 10 hospitals with the nation's highest volumes had lower mortality rates than the remaining high-volume centers (2.1% vs 6.2%, P < .01). The strong association between institutional volume and mortality could not be attributed to patient case-mix differences or referral bias. CONCLUSIONS: Although volume-outcome relationships have been reported for many complex surgical procedures, hospital experience is particularly important with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Patients considering this procedure should be given the option of care at a high-volume referral center.

Avoiding the unintended consequences of growth in medical care: how might more be worse?

The United States has experienced dramatic growth in both the technical capabilities and share of resources devoted to medical care. While the benefits of more medical care are widely recognized, the possibility that harm may result from growth has received little attention. Because harm from more medical care is unexpected, findings of harm are discounted or ignored. We suggest that such findings may indicate a more general problem and deserve serious consideration. First, we delineate 2 levels of decision making where more medical care may be introduced: (1) decisions about whether or not to use a discrete diagnostic or therapeutic intervention and (2) decisions about whether to add system capacity, eg, the decision to purchase another scanner or employ another physician. Second, we explore how more medical care at either level may lead to harm. More diagnosis creates the potential for labeling and detection of pseudodisease--disease that would never become apparent to patients during their lifetime without testing. More treatment may lead to tampering, interventions to correct random rather than systematic variation, and lower treatment thresholds, where the risks outweigh the potential benefits. Because there are more diagnoses to treat and more treatments to provide, physicians may be more likely to make mistakes and to be distracted from the issues of greatest concern to their patients. Finally, we turn to the fundamental challenge--reducing the risk of harm from more medical care. We identify 4 ways in which inadequate information and improper reasoning may allow harmful practices to be adopted-a constrained model of disease, excessive extrapolation, a missing level of analysis, and the assumption that more is better.

Maneuvering the mundane minefield: a practical guide to legal opinions in healthcare transactions.

This Article examines the multitude of issues presented when attorneys prepare legal opinions for health law transactions. The authors analyze the two major pieces of guidance for the drafting of such opinions, and offer practical guidance and checklists for the preparation of such opinions.

Variation profiles of common surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND: Rates of many surgical procedures vary widely across both large and small geographic regions. Although variation in health care use has long been described, few studies have systematically compared variation profiles across surgical procedures. The goal of this study was to examine current patterns of regional variation in the rates of common surgical procedures. METHODS: The study population consisted of patients enrolled in Medicare in 1995, excluding those enrolled in risk-bearing health maintenance organizations. Patients ranged in age from 65 to 99 years. Using data from hospital discharge abstracts, we calculated rates of 11 common inpatient procedures for each of 306 US hospital referral regions (HRRs). To assess the relative variability of each procedure, we determined the number of low and high outlier regions (HRRs with rates < 50% or > 150% the national average) and the ratio of highest to lowest HRR rates. RESULTS: Procedures differed markedly in their variability. Rates of hip fracture repair, resection for colorectal cancer, and cholecystectomy varied only 1.9- to 2.9-fold across HRRs (0, 0, and 4 outlier regions, respectively). Coronary artery bypass grafting, transurethral prostatectomy, mastectomy, and total hip replacement had intermediate variation profiles, varying 3.5- to 4.7-fold across regions (8, 10, 16, and 17 outlier regions, respectively). Lower extremity revascularization, carotid endarterectomy, back surgery, and radical prostatectomy had the highest variation profiles, varying 6.5- to 10.1-fold across HRRs (25, 32, 39, and 56 outlier regions, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although the use of many surgical procedures varies widely across geographic areas, rates of "discretionary" procedures are most variable. To avoid potential overuse or underuse, efforts to increase consensus in clinical decision making should focus on these high variation procedures.