Association of Hospital Participation in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced With Medicare Spending and Hospital Incentive Payments.

Importance: Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-A) is a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) initiative that aims to produce financial savings by incentivizing decreases in clinical spending. Incentives consist of financial bonuses from CMS to hospitals or penalties paid by hospitals to CMS. Objective: To investigate the association of hospital participation in BPCI-A with spending, and to characterize hospitals receiving financial bonuses vs penalties. Design, Setting, and Participants: Difference-in-differences and cross-sectional analyses of 4 754 139 patient episodes using 2013-2019 US Medicare claims at 694 participating and 2852 nonparticipating hospitals merged with hospital and market characteristics. Exposures: BPCI-A model years 1 and 2 (October 1, 2018, through December 31, 2019). Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitals' per-episode spending, CMS gross and net spending, and the incentive allocated to each hospital. Results: The study identified 694 participating hospitals. The analysis observed a -$175 change in mean per-episode spending (95% CI, -$378 to $28) and an aggregate spending change of -$75.1 million (95% CI, -$162.1 million to $12.0 million) across the 428 670 episodes in BPCI-A model years 1 and 2. However, CMS disbursed $354.3 million (95% CI, $212.0 million to $496.0 million) more in bonuses than it received in penalties. Hospital participation in BPCI-A was associated with a net loss to CMS of $279.2 million (95% CI, $135.0 million to $423.0 million). Hospitals in the lowest quartile of Medicaid days received a mean penalty of $0.41 million; (95% CI, $0.09 million to $0.72 million), while those in the highest quartile received a mean bonus of $1.57 million; (95% CI, $1.09 million to $2.08 million). Similar patterns were observed for hospitals across increasing quartiles of Disproportionate Share Hospital percentage and of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Among US hospitals measured between 2013 and 2019, participation in BPCI-A was significantly associated with an increase in net CMS spending. Bonuses accrued disproportionately to hospitals providing care for marginalized communities.

ABCDEF Bundle Practices for Critically Ill Children: An International Survey of 161 PICUs in 18 Countries.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate current international practice in PICUs regarding components of the "Assessing Pain, Both Spontaneous Awakening and Breathing Trials, Choice of Sedation, Delirium Monitoring/Management, Early Exercise/Mobility, and Family Engagement/Empowerment" (ABCDEF) bundle. DESIGN: Online surveys conducted between 2017 and 2019. SETTING: One-hundred sixty-one PICUs across the United States (n = 82), Canada (n = 14), Brazil (n = 27), and Europe (n = 38) participating in the Prevalence of Acute Rehabilitation for Kids in the PICU study. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 161 participating PICUs, 83% were in academic teaching hospitals and 42% were in free-standing children's hospitals. Median size was 16 beds (interquartile range, 10-24 beds). Only 15 PICUs (9%) had incorporated all six ABCDEF bundle components into routine practice. Standardized pain assessment (A) was the most common (91%), followed by family engagement (F, 88%) and routine sedation assessment (C) with validated scales (84%). Protocols for testing extubation readiness or conducting spontaneous breathing trials (B) were reported in 57%, with 34% reporting a ventilator weaning protocol. Routine delirium monitoring with a validated screening tool (D) was reported by 44% of PICUs, and 26% had a guideline, protocol, or policy for early exercise/mobility (E). Practices for spontaneous breathing trials were variable in 29% of Canadian PICUs versus greater than 50% in the other regions. Delirium monitoring was lowest in Brazilian PICUs (18%) versus greater than 40% in other regions, and family engagement was reported in 55% of European PICUs versus greater than 90% in other regions. CONCLUSIONS: ABCDEF bundle components have been adopted with substantial variability across regions. Additional research must rigorously evaluate the efficacy of specific elements with a focus on B, D, E, and full ABCDEF bundle implementation. Implementation science is needed to facilitate an understanding of the barriers to ABCDEF implementation and sustainability with a focus on specific cultural and regional differences.

Prognostic Values of the Timing of Antibiotic Administration and the Sepsis Bundle Component in Elderly Patients With Septic Shock: A Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: Elderly patients are more susceptible to sepsis and septic shock. Early administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics is a key element of the sepsis management of bundle. Our study aimed to investigate the association between the timing of antibiotics administration and the risk of adverse outcomes in elderly patients with septic shock, and to examine the prognostic value of other bundle elements. METHOD: This is a single-center, retrospective, case-control study including elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years) diagnosed with septic shock in the emergency department between October 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019. Eligible patients were divided into early (within 1 h) and late (beyond 1 h) groups according to the time interval between septic shock recognition and initial antibiotic administration. The characteristics, sepsis-related severity scores, management strategy, and outcomes were recorded. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify the independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: A total of 331 patients were included in the study. The overall 90-day mortality rate was 43.8% (145/331). There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, sepsis-related severity scores, and management strategy between the two groups. There was no significant difference between the early and late groups in the rate of intensive care unit transfer (46.4% vs. 46.6%, P = 0.96), endotracheal intubation (28.3% vs. 27.5%, P = 0.87), renal replacement therapy (21.7% vs. 21.8%, P = 1.00), or 90-day mortality (44.2% vs. 43.5%, P = 0.90). Serum lactate level (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.15, P < 0.01) and source control (HR = 0.56, P = 0.03) were identified as independent factors associated with 90-day mortality. CONCLUSION: The timing of antibiotic administration was not associated with adverse outcomes in elderly patients with septic shock. Serum lactate level and source control implementation were independent prognostic factors in these patients.

Four consecutive yearly point-prevalence studies in Wales indicate lack of improvement in sepsis care on the wards.

The 'Sepsis Six' bundle was promoted as a deliverable tool outside of the critical care settings, but there is very little data available on the progress and change of sepsis care outside the critical care environment in the UK. Our aim was to compare the yearly prevalence, outcome and the Sepsis Six bundle compliance in patients at risk of mortality from sepsis in non-intensive care environments. Patients with a National Early Warning Score (NEWS) of 3 or above and suspected or proven infection were enrolled into four yearly 24-h point prevalence studies, carried out in fourteen hospitals across Wales from 2016 to 2019. We followed up patients to 30 days between 2016-2019 and to 90 days between 2017 and 2019. Out of the 26,947 patients screened 1651 fulfilled inclusion criteria and were recruited. The full 'Sepsis Six' care bundle was completed on 223 (14.0%) occasions, with no significant difference between the years. On 190 (11.5%) occasions none of the bundle elements were completed. There was no significant correlation between bundle element compliance, NEWS or year of study. One hundred and seventy (10.7%) patients were seen by critical care outreach; the 'Sepsis Six' bundle was completed significantly more often in this group (54/170, 32.0%) than for patients who were not reviewed by critical care outreach (168/1385, 11.6%; p < 0.0001). Overall survival to 30 days was 81.7% (1349/1651), with a mean survival time of 26.5 days (95% CI 26.1-26.9) with no difference between each year of study. 90-day survival for years 2017-2019 was 74.7% (949/1271), with no difference between the years. In multivariate regression we identified older age, heart failure, recent chemotherapy, higher frailty score and do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation orders as significantly associated with increased 30-day mortality. Our data suggests that despite efforts to increase sepsis awareness within the NHS, there is poor compliance with the sepsis care bundles and no change in the high mortality over the study period. Further research is needed to determine which time-sensitive ward-based interventions can reduce mortality in patients with sepsis and how can these results be embedded to routine clinical practice.Trial registration Defining Sepsis on the Wards ISRCTN 86502304 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN86502304 prospectively registered 09/05/2016.

The Use of Ancillary Services Under a Bundled Care Versus a Fee-For-Service Payment Model.

OBJECTIVES: Colocated services in a team-based integrated practice unit (IPU) optimize care of pelvic floor disorders. Our goal was to compare ancillary service utilization in a multidisciplinary IPU between patients covered by a bundled payment model (BPM) versus a traditional fee-for-service model (FFSM). METHODS: Medical records of women attending an IPU for pelvic floor disorders with colocated services, including nutrition, social work, psychiatry, physical therapy, and subspecialty care between October 2017 and December 2018, were included in this retrospective chart review. All patients were offered treatment with ancillary services according to standardized care pathways. Data extracted included patient demographics, pelvic floor disorder diagnoses, baseline severity measures, payment model, and ancillary services used. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression identified variables predicting higher uptake of ancillary services. RESULTS: A total of 575 women with pelvic floor disorders presented for care during the study period, of which 35.14% attended at least 1 appointment with any ancillary services provider. Ancillary service utilization did not differ between patients in the BPM group and those in the FFSM group (36.22 vs 33.47%; P = 0.489). Social work services were more likely to be used by the BPM compared with the FFSM group (15.95 vs 6.28%; P < 0.001). The diagnosis of fecal incontinence was associated with a higher chance of using any ancillary service (odds ratio, 4.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.81-13.33; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: One third of patients with pelvic floor disorders receiving care in an IPU used colocated ancillary services. Utilization does not differ between payment models.

Rates of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia Following Implementation of a Novel Prevention Bundle.

Importance: Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) rates in the United States remain high and have changed little in the last decade. Objective: To develop a consistent BPD prevention bundle in a systematic approach to decrease BPD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study included 484 infants with birth weights from 501 to 1500 g admitted to a level 3 neonatal intensive care unit in the Kaiser Permanente Southern California system from 2009 through 2019. The study period was divided into 3 periods: 1, baseline (2009); 2, initial changes based on ongoing cycles of Plan-Do-Study-Act (2010-2014); and 3, full implementation of successive Plan-Do-Study-Act results (2015-2019). Interventions: A BPD prevention system of care bundle evolved with a shared mental model that BPD is avoidable. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was BPD in infants with less than 33 weeks' gestational age (hereafter referred to as BPD <33). Other measures included adjusted BPD <33, BPD severity grade, and adjusted median postmenstrual age (PMA) at hospital discharge. Balancing measures were adjusted mortality and adjusted mortality or specified morbidities. Results: The study population included 484 infants with a mean (SD) birth weight of 1070 (277) g; a mean (SD) gestational age of 28.6 (2.9) weeks; 252 female infants (52.1%); and 61 Black infants (12.6%). During the 3 study periods, BPD <33 decreased from 9 of 29 patients (31.0%) to 3 of 184 patients (1.6%) (P < .001 for trend); special cause variation was observed. The standardized morbidity ratio for the adjusted BPD <33 decreased from 1.2 (95% CI, 0.7-1.9) in 2009 to 0.4 (95% CI, 0.2-0.8) in 2019. The rates of combined grades 1, 2, and 3 BPD decreased from 7 of 29 patients (24.1%) to 17 of 183 patients (9.3%) (P < .008 for trend). Grade 2 BPD rates decreased from 3 of 29 patients (10.3%) to 5 of 183 patients (2.7%) (P = .02 for trend). Adjusted median PMA at home discharge decreased by 2 weeks, from 38.2 (95% CI, 37.3-39.1) weeks in 2009 to 36.8 (95% CI, 36.6-37.1) weeks during the last 3 years (2017-2019) of the full implementation period. Adjusted mortality was unchanged, whereas adjusted mortality or specified morbidities decreased significantly. Conclusions and Relevance: A sustained low rate of BPD was observed in infants after the implementation of a detailed BPD system of care.

Effectiveness of sepsis bundle application and outcomes predictors to cirrhotic patients with septic shock.

INTRODUCTION: Cirrhotic patients with septic shock have a poorer prognosis compared with the general population. Our study aimed to investigate the survival benefit of the implementation of hour-1 bundle proposed by Surviving Sepsis Campaign, and to analyze the predictors associated with short-term mortality of these patients. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective case-control study was conducted among adult patients who visited the emergency department between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. All patients with a diagnosis of liver cirrhosis and septic shock were enrolled. Their baseline characteristics, laboratory results, source of sepsis, and sepsis bundle management were recorded. We further divided the patients into survivor and non-survivor groups to identify independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients were eligible for this study. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 53.4% (47/88). The proportion of hour-1 bundle achievement was 30.7% (27/88). There were no significant mortality differences between the hour-1 bundle achievement and non-achievement groups (44.4% vs. 57.4%, p = 0.35). Compared with the patients in the survivor group, patients in the non-survivor group had significantly more advanced stage of cirrhosis and a lower proportion of receiving source control (4.3% vs. 22.0%, p = 0.02). The chronic liver failure-sequential organ failure assessment (CLIF-SOFA) score (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] =1.52, p < 0.01), serum lactate (AHR =1.03, p < 0.01), and source control (AHR =0.54, p = 0.02) were identified as independent prognostic factors in the multivariate regression model. Furthermore, the CLIF-SOFA score (area under curve [AUC]: 0.81) and lactate levels (AUC: 0.77) revealed good mortality discrimination ability in cirrhotic patients with septic shock. CONCLUSIONS: The application of the hour-1 bundle did not reveal a significant survival benefit to cirrhotic patients with septic shock. Clinicians could utilize CLIF-SOFA scores and lactate levels for mortality risk stratification and put more emphasis on the feasibility of source control to improve their prognosis.

Prospective Observational Multisite Study of Handover in the Emergency Department: Theory versus Practice.

INTRODUCTION: The handover process in the emergency department (ED) is relevant for patient outcomes and lays the foundation for adequate patient care. The aim of this study was to examine the current prehospital to ED handover practice with regard to content, structure, and scope. METHODS: We carried out a prospective, multicenter observational study using a specifically developed checklist. The steps of the handover process in the ED were documented in relation to qualification of the emergency medical services (EMS) staff, disease severity, injury patterns, and treatment priority. RESULTS: We documented and evaluated 721 handovers based on the checklist. According to ISBAR (Identification, Situation, Background, Assessment, Recommendation), MIST (Mechanism, Injuries, Signs/Symptoms, Treatment), and BAUM (Situation [German: Bestand], Anamnesis, Examination [German: Untersuchung], Measures), almost all handovers showed a deficit in structure and scope (99.4%). The age of the patient was reported 339 times (47.0%) at the time of handover. The time of the emergency onset was reported in 272 cases (37.7%). The following vital signs were transferred more frequently for resuscitation room patients than for treatment room patients: blood pressure (BP)/(all comparisons p < 0.05), heart rate (HR), oxygen saturation (SpO2) and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). Physicians transmitted these vital signs more frequently than paramedics BP, HR, SpO2, and GCS. A handover with a complete ABCDE algorithm (Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability, Environment/Exposure) took place only 31 times (4.3%). There was a significant difference between the occupational groups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Despite many studies on handover standardization, there is a remarkable inconsistency in the transfer of information. A "hand-off bundle" must be created to standardize the handover process, consisting of a uniform mnemonic accompanied by education of staff, training, and an audit process.

Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of the ABCDE Bundle: Impact of Bundle Adherence on Inpatient and 1-Year Mortality and Costs of Care.

OBJECTIVES: Growing evidence supports the Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility (ABCDE) bundle processes as improving a number of short- and long-term clinical outcomes for patients requiring ICU care. To assess the cost-effectiveness of this intervention, we determined the impact of ABCDE bundle adherence on inpatient and 1-year mortality, quality-adjusted life-years, length of stay, and costs of care. DESIGN: We conducted a 2-year, prospective, cost-effectiveness study in 12 adult ICUs in six hospitals belonging to a large, integrated healthcare delivery system. SETTING: Hospitals included a large, urban tertiary referral center and five community hospitals. ICUs included medical/surgical, trauma, neurologic, and cardiac care units. PATIENTS: The study included 2,953 patients, 18 years old or older, with an ICU stay greater than 24 hours, who were on a ventilator for more than 24 hours and less than 14 days. INTERVENTION: ABCDE bundle. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We used propensity score-adjusted regression models to determine the impact of high bundle adherence on inpatient mortality, discharge status, length of stay, and costs. A Markov model was used to estimate the potential effect of improved bundle adherence on healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life-years in the year following ICU admission. We found that patients with high ABCDE bundle adherence (≥ 60%) had significantly decreased odds of inpatient mortality (odds ratio 0.28) and significantly higher costs ($3,920) of inpatient care. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of high bundle adherence was $15,077 (95% CI, $13,675-$16,479) per life saved and $1,057 per life-year saved. High bundle adherence was associated with a 0.12 increase in quality-adjusted life-years, a $4,949 increase in 1-year care costs, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $42,120 per quality-adjusted life-year. CONCLUSIONS: The ABCDE bundle appears to be a cost-effective means to reduce in-hospital and 1-year mortality for patients with an ICU stay.

Spillover effects of mandatory hip and knee replacement surgery bundles in medicare.

BACKGROUND: Medicare used the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) Model to mandate that hospitals in certain health care markets accept bundled payments for lower extremity joint replacement surgery. CJR has reduced spending with stable quality as intended among Medicare fee-for-service patients, but benefits could "spill over" to individuals insured through private health plans. Definitive evidence of spillovers remains lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between CJR participation and changes in outcomes among privately insured individuals. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: We used 2013-2017 Health Care Cost Institute claims for 418,016 privately insured individuals undergoing joint replacement in 75 CJR and 121 Non-CJR markets. Multivariable generalized linear models with hospital and market random effects and time fixed effects were used to analyze the association between CJR participation and changes in outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Total episode spending, discharge to institutional post-acute care, and quality (e.g., surgical complications, readmissions). RESULTS: Patients in CJR and Non-CJR markets did not differ in total episode spending (difference of -$157, 95% CI -$1043 to $728, p = 0.73) or discharge to institutional post-acute care (difference of -1.1%, 95% CI -3.2%-1.0%, p = 0.31). Similarly, patients in the two groups did not differ in quality or other utilization outcomes. Findings were generally similar in stratified and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: There was a lack of evidence of cost or utilization spillovers from CJR to privately insured individuals. There may be limits in the ability of certain value-based payment reforms to drive broad changes in care delivery and patient outcomes.

Association of Medicare Mandatory Bundled Payment System for Hip and Knee Joint Replacement With Racial/Ethnic Difference in Joint Replacement Care.

Importance: There are marked racial/ethnic differences in hip and knee joint replacement care as well as concerns that value-based payments may exacerbate existing racial/ethnic disparities in care. Objective: To examine changes in joint replacement care associated with Medicare's Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model among White, Black, and Hispanic patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of Medicare claims from 2013 through 2017 among White, Black, and Hispanic patients undergoing joint replacement in 67 treatment (selected for CJR participation) and 103 control metropolitan statistical areas. Exposures: The CJR model holds hospitals accountable for spending and quality of joint replacement care during care episodes (index hospitalization through 90 days after discharge). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were spending, discharge to institutional postacute care, and readmission during care episodes. Results: Among 688 346 patients, 442 163 (64.2%) were women, and 87 286 (12.7%) were 85 years or older. Under CJR, spending decreased by $439 for White patients (95% CI, -$718 to -$161; from pre-CJR spending in treatment metropolitan statistical areas of $25 264) but did not change for Black patients and Hispanic patients. Discharges to institutional postacute care decreased for all groups (-2.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to -0.4, from pre-CJR risk of 46.2% for White patients; -6.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -2.2, from pre-CJR risk of 59.5% for Black patients; and -4.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to -1.0, from pre-CJR risk of 54.3% for Hispanic patients). Readmission risk decreased for Black patients by 3.1 percentage points (95% CI, -5.9 to -0.4, from pre-CJR risk of 21.8%) and did not change for White patients and Hispanic patients. Under CJR, Black-White differences in discharges to institutional postacute care decreased by 3.4 percentage points (95% CI, -6.4 to -0.5, from the pre-CJR Black-White difference of 13.3 percentage points). No evidence was found demonstrating that Black-White differences changed for other outcomes or that Hispanic-White differences changed for any outcomes under CJR. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients receiving joint replacements, CJR was associated with decreased readmissions for Black patients. Furthermore, Black patients experienced a greater decrease in discharges to institutional postacute care relative to White patients, representing relative improvements despite concerns that value-based payment models may exacerbate existing disparities. Nonetheless, differences between White and Black patients in joint replacement care still persisted even after these changes.

Normothermia in Patients With Sepsis Who Present to Emergency Departments Is Associated With Low Compliance With Sepsis Bundles and Increased In-Hospital Mortality Rate.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of normothermia on compliance with sepsis bundles and in-hospital mortality in patients with sepsis who present to emergency departments. DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter observational study. PATIENTS: Nineteen university-affiliated hospitals of the Korean Sepsis Alliance participated in this study. Data were collected regarding patients who visited emergency departments for sepsis during the 1-month period. The patients were divided into three groups based on their body temperature at the time of triage in the emergency department (i.e., hypothermia [< 36°C] vs normothermia [36-38°C] vs hyperthermia [> 38°C]). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 64,021 patients who visited emergency departments, 689 with community-acquired sepsis were analyzed (182 hyperthermic, 420 normothermic, and 87 hypothermic patients). The rate of compliance with the total hour-1 bundle was lowest in the normothermia group (6.0% vs 9.3% in hyperthermia vs 13.8% in hypothermia group; p = 0.032), the rate for lactate measurement was lowest in the normothermia group (62.1% vs 73.1% vs 75.9%; p = 0.005), and the blood culture rate was significantly lower in the normothermia than in the hyperthermia group (p < 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rates in the hyperthermia, normothermia, and hypothermia groups were 8.5%, 20.6%, and 30.8%, respectively (p < 0.001), but there was no significant association between compliance with sepsis bundles and in-hospital mortality. However, in a multivariate analysis, compared with hyperthermia, normothermia was significantly associated with an increased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 2.472; 95% CI, 1.005-6.080). This association remained significant even after stratifying patients by median lactate level. CONCLUSIONS: Normothermia at emergency department triage was significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and a lower rate of compliance with the sepsis bundle. Despite several limitations, our findings suggest a need for new strategies to improve sepsis outcomes in this group of patients.

Medicare's Bundled Payment Initiatives for Hospital-Initiated Episodes: Evidence and Evolution.

Policy Points Evidence suggests that bundled payment contracting can slow the growth of payer costs relative to fee-for-service contracting, although bundled payment models may not reduce absolute costs. Bundled payments may be more effective than fee-for-service payments in containing costs for certain medical conditions. For the most part, Medicare's bundled payment initiatives have not been associated with a worsening of quality in terms of readmissions, emergency department use, and mortality. Some evidence suggests a worsening of other quality measures for certain medical conditions. Bundled payment contracting involves trade-offs: Expanding a bundle's scope and duration may better contain costs, but a more comprehensive bundle may be less attractive to providers, reducing their willingness to accept it as an alternative to fee-for-service payment. CONTEXT: Bundled payments have been promoted as an alternative to fee-for-service payments that can mitigate the incentives for service volume under the fee-for-service model. As Medicare has gained experience with bundled payments, it has widened their scope and increased their duration. However, there have been few reviews of the empirical literature on the impact of Medicare's bundled payment programs on cost, resource use, utilization, and quality. METHODS: We examined the history and features of 16 of Medicare's bundled payment programs involving hospital-initiated episodes of care and conducted a literature review of articles about those programs. Database and additional searches yielded 1,479 articles. We evaluate the studies' methodological quality and summarize the quantitative findings about Medicare expenditures and quality of care from 37 studies that used higher-quality research designs. FINDINGS: Medicare's bundled payment initiatives have varied in their design features, such as episode scope and duration. Many initiatives were associated with little to no reduction in Medicare expenditures, unless large pricing discounts for providers were negotiated in advance. Initiatives that included post-acute care services were associated with lower expenditures for certain conditions. Hospitals may have been able to reduce internal production costs with help from physicians via gainsharing. Most initiatives were not associated with significant changes in quality of care, as measured by readmission and mortality rates. Of the significant changes in readmission rates, the results were mixed, showing increases and decreases associated with bundled payments. Some evidence suggested that worse patient outcomes were associated bundled payments, although most results were not statistically significant. Results on case-mix selection were mixed: Several initiatives were associated with reductions in episode severity, whereas others were associated with little change. CONCLUSIONS: Bundled payments for hospital-initiated episodes may be a good alternative to fee-for-service payments. Bundled payments can help slow the growth of payer spending, although they do not necessarily reduce absolute spending. They are associated with lower provider production costs, and there is no overwhelming evidence of compromised quality. However, designing a bundled payment contract that is attractive to both providers and payers proves to be a challenge.

Can vertically integrated health systems provide greater value: The case of hospitals under the comprehensive care for joint replacement model?

OBJECTIVE: We aim to assess whether system providers perform better than nonsystem providers under an alternative payment model that incentivizes high-quality, cost-efficient care. We posit that the payment environment and the incentives it provides can affect the relative performance of vertically integrated health systems. To examine this potential influence, we compare system and nonsystem hospitals participating in Medicare's Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model. DATA SOURCES: We used hospital cost and quality data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services linked to data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Compendium of US Health Systems and hospital characteristics from secondary sources. The data include 706 hospitals in 67 metropolitan areas. STUDY DESIGN: We estimated regressions that compared system and nonsystem hospitals' 2017 cost and quality performance providing lower joint replacements among hospitals required to participate in CJR. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Among CJR hospitals, system hospitals that provided comprehensive services in their local market had 5.8 percent ($1612) lower episode costs (P = .01) than nonsystem hospitals. System hospitals that did not provide such services had 3.5 percent ($967) lower episode costs (P = .14). Quality differences between system hospitals and nonsystem hospitals were mostly small and statistically insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: When operating under alternative payment model incentives, vertical integration may enable hospitals to lower costs with similar quality scores.

Improving the use of the 'COUGH' bundle in Surgical High Dependency Unit, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee.

Developing respiratory complications postoperatively is one of the major determinants of longer hospital stay, morbidity, mortality and increased healthcare costs. The incidence of postoperative respiratory complications varies from 1% to 23%. Given that postoperative respiratory complications are relatively common and costly, there have been various studies which look at ways to reduce the risk of these occurring. One such protocol is the ICOUGH bundle which stands for Incentive spirometry, Coughing and deep breathing, Oral care, patient Understanding, Getting out of bed and Head of bed elevation. This has been adapted locally to the Coughing and deep breathing, Oral care, patient Understanding, Getting out of bed and Head of bed elevation (COUGH) bundle which consists of these components excluding incentive spirometry. Within our surgical high dependency unit (HDU), the COUGH bundle should be implemented in patients who have a moderate or high risk of developing postoperative respiratory complications with an Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score of 26 or above. Studies have shown that the ICOUGH bundle has reduced rates of pneumonia and unplanned intubation in general surgical and vascular patients. Baseline data taken from surgical HDU showed that the COUGH bundle was not well implemented. One out of eight patients who had an ARISCAT score greater than 26 had the COUGH bundle implemented on admission to the unit. Three out of eight patients had the ARISCAT score documented in their admission medical review. One patient who should have received the bundle, but did not, developed a hospital acquired pneumonia postoperatively. To address this issue, we aimed to increase awareness surrounding the COUGH bundle and to increase the number of patients who had the COUGH bundle started on admission. This quality improvement project had four cycles (plan, do, study, act) and after these, 100% of patients who had an ARISCAT score of 26 or more had the COUGH bundle implemented.

Assessment of the quality, content and perceived utility of local maternity guidelines in hospitals in England implementing the saving babies' lives care bundle to reduce stillbirth.

INTRODUCTION: The UK Department of Health have targeted a reduction in stillbirth by 50% by 2025; to achieve this, the first version of the Saving Babies' Lives Care Bundle (SBLCB) was developed by NHS England in 2016 to improve four key areas of antenatal and intrapartum care. Clinical practice guidelines are a key means by which quality improvement initiatives are disseminated to front-line staff. METHODS: Seventy-five clinical practice guidelines covering the four areas of antenatal and intrapartum care in the first version of SBLCB were obtained from 19 maternity providers. The content and quality of guidelines were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool. Maternity health professionals in participating organisations were invited to participate in an anonymous survey to determine perceptions toward and experiences of the use of clinical practice guidelines using a series of Likert scales. RESULTS: Unit guidelines showed considerable variation in quality with median scores of 50%-58%. Only 4 (5.6%) guidelines were recommended for use in clinical practice without modifications, 54 (75.0%) were recommended for use subject to modifications and 12 (16.7%) were not recommended for use. The lowest scoring domains were 'rigour of development', 'stakeholder involvement' and 'applicability'. A significant minority of unit guidelines omitted recommendations from national guidelines. The majority of staff believed that clinical practice guidelines standardised and improved the quality of care but over 30% had insufficient time to use them and 24% stated they were unable to implement recommendations. CONCLUSION: To successfully implement initiatives such as the SBLCB change is needed to local clinical practice guidelines to reduce variation in quality and to ensure they are consistent with national recommendations . In addition, to improve clinical practice, adequate time and resources need to be in place to deliver and evaluate care recommended in the SBLCB.

Spending And Quality After Three Years Of Medicare's Voluntary Bundled Payment For Joint Replacement Surgery.

Medicare has reinforced its commitment to voluntary bundled payment by building upon the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative via an ongoing successor program, the BPCI Advanced Model. Although lower extremity joint replacement (LEJR) is the highest-volume episode in both BPCI and BPCI Advanced, there is a paucity of independent evidence about its long-term impact on outcomes and about whether improvements vary by timing of participation or arise from patient selection rather than changes in clinical practice. We found that over three years, compared to no participation, participation in BPCI was associated with a 1.6 percent differential decrease in average LEJR episode spending with no differential changes in quality, driven by early participants. Patient selection accounted for 27 percent of episode savings. Our findings have important policy implications in view of BPCI Advanced and its two participation waves.

Improving Sepsis Bundle Implementation Times: A Nursing Process Improvement Approach.

BACKGROUND: Early recognition of sepsis in the emergency room (ER) has been shown to improve treatment intervention times and decrease mortality. LOCAL PROBLEM: Failure to recognize early signs and symptoms of sepsis in the ER has led to poor sepsis bundle completion times. METHODS: A comparison of preintervention and postintervention data was performed to determine whether sepsis bundle implementation times, mortality, and length of stay (LOS) improved. INTERVENTIONS: An ER Nurse Sepsis Identification Tool, leadership buy-in from key stakeholders, and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) education were implemented. RESULTS: Postintervention, average bundle compliance time decreased 458 minutes (P < .001), average antibiotic administration time decreased 101 minutes (P < .001), overall sepsis mortality decreased 5.9% (P = .074), and there was no change to LOS. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of an ER early sepsis identification tool, leadership buy-in, and SIRS education can lead to improved bundle implementation times in the ER.

Do Bundled Payment Programs in Joint Replacement Care Hold Promise for Improving Patient Outcomes?

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Innovation Center offers two alternative payment models for joint replacement: the voluntary Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) model and the mandatory Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model. As CMS considers methods for cost reduction, research is needed to understand patient-level outcomes and organizational-level success factors. A retrospective cross-sectional study of hospitals was performed, using regression models to evaluate an aggregate patient satisfaction score, complication rates, and operational differences among BPCI, CJR, and nonparticipating hospitals. Results show that BPCI hospitals received significantly better patient satisfaction scores (88.6) than CJR hospitals (86.0), but complication rates were not significantly different between CJR and BPCI hospitals (2.83 and 2.77, respectively). Factors associated with BPCI participation include academic affiliation, a Northeast region locale, and having a higher CMS efficiency score. Thus, requiring more hospitals to participate in CMS-bundled payment programs as a federal policy may not be the optimal way to improve patient satisfaction and outcomes. Rather, the CJR and BPCI programs should be further studied, and the results generalized for use by nonparticipating hospitals to encourage preparation and participation in CMS value-based initiatives.

Provider Practice Competition and Adoption of Medicare's Oncology Care Model.

BACKGROUND: There is a concern that the Oncology Care Model (OCM), a voluntary bundled payment program, may incentivize mergers and acquisitions among physician practices leading to reduced competition and price increases. These concerns are heightened if OCM is preferentially adopted in competitive health care markets because it could result in reduced competition, but little is known about the characteristics of markets where OCM is adopted. OBJECTIVE: To measure the association between regional market competition among medical oncologists with the initial adoption of OCM. RESEARCH DESIGN: The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI), a measure of competition, was calculated for hospital referral regions (HRRs) using secondary data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The relationship between HHI and OCM adoption was assessed using a 2-part regression model adjusting for the market-level number of practices, physician density, average practice size, sociodemographic characteristics, and medical resources. A count model on all HRRs was also estimated to assess an overall effect. SUBJECTS: A total of 10,788 physicians in 3,537 practices who billed Medicare for oncology services in 2015. RESULTS: OCM was adopted in 114 (37%) of the 306 HRRs. We found that practices in competitive health care markets were more likely to adopt OCM than in noncompetitive markets. Two-part regression analysis indicated a nonlinear relationship between HHI and OCM adoption. Average practice size, number of practices in an HRR, and the hospital bed rate were positively associated with adoption, whereas the rate of full-time equivalent hospital employees to 1000 residents was negatively associated with adoption. CONCLUSIONS: OCM adoption was higher in HRRs with greater competition. Careful monitoring of market-level changes among OCM adopters should be undertaken to ensure that the benefits of the OCM outweigh the negative consequences of possible changes in competition.