Trends in Low-Value Health Service Use and Spending in the US Medicare Fee-for-Service Program, 2014-2018.

Importance: Low-value care, defined as care offering no net benefit in specific clinical scenarios, is associated with harmful outcomes in patients and wasteful spending. Despite a national education campaign and increasing attention on reducing health care waste, recent trends in low-value care delivery remain unknown. Objective: To assess national trends in low-value care use and spending. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, analyses of low-value care use and spending from 2014 to 2018 were conducted using 100% Medicare fee-for-service enrollment and claims data. Included individuals were aged 65 years or older and continuously enrolled in Medicare parts A, B, and D during each measurement year and the previous year. Data were analyzed from September 2019 through December 2020. Exposure: Being enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare for a period of time, in years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The Milliman MedInsight Health Waste Calculator was used to assess 32 claims-based measures of low-value care associated with Choosing Wisely recommendations and other professional guidelines. The calculator designates services as wasteful, likely wasteful, or not wasteful based on an absence of indication of appropriate use in the claims history; calculator-designated wasteful services were defined as low-value care. Spending was calculated as claim-line level (ie, spending on the low-value service) and claim level (ie, spending on the low-value service plus associated services), adjusting for inflation. Results: Among 21 045 759 individuals with fee-for-service Medicare (mean [SD] age, 77.4 [7.9] years; 12 515 915 [59.5%] women), the percentage receiving any of 32 low-value services decreased from 36.3% (95% CI, 36.3%-36.4%) to 33.6% (95% CI, 33.6%-33.6%) from 2014 to 2018. Uses of low-value services per 1000 individuals decreased from 677.8 (95% CI, 676.2-679.5) to 632.7 (95% CI, 632.6-632.8) from 2014 to 2018. Three services comprised approximately two-thirds of uses among 32 low-value services per 1000 individuals: preoperative laboratory testing decreased from 213.8 (95% CI, 213.4-214.2) to 166.2 (95% CI, 166.2-166.2), while opioids for back pain increased from 154.4 (95% CI, 153.6-155.2) to 182.1 (95% CI, 182.1-182.1) and antibiotics for upper respiratory infections increased from 75.0 (95% CI, 75.0-75.1) to 82 (95% CI, 82.0-82.0). Spending per 1000 individuals on low-value care also decreased, from $52 765.5 (95% CI, $51 952.3-$53 578.6) to $46 921.7 (95% CI, $46 593.7-$47 249.7) at the claim-line level and from $160 070.4 (95% CI, $158 999.8-$161 141.0) to $144 741.1 (95% CI, $144 287.5-$145 194.7) at the claim level. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that among individuals with fee-for-service Medicare receiving any of 32 measured services, low-value care use and spending decreased marginally from 2014 to 2018, despite a national education campaign in collaboration with clinician specialty societies and increased attention on low-value care. While most use of low-value care came from 3 services, 1 of these was opioid prescriptions, which increased over time despite the harms associated with their use. These findings may represent several opportunities to prevent patient harm and lower spending.

Adapting summary scores for the PROMIS-29 v2.0 for use among older adults with multiple chronic conditions.

PURPOSE: The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system 29-item profile (PROMIS-29 v2.0) is a widely used health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measure. Summary scores for physical and mental HRQoL have recently been developed for the PROMIS-29 using a general population. Our purpose was to adapt these summary scores to a population of older adults with multiple chronic conditions. METHODS: We collected the PROMIS-29 v2.0 for 1359 primary care patients age 65+ with at least 2 of 13 chronic conditions. PROMIS-29 has 7 domains, plus a single-item pain intensity scale. We used exploratory factor analysis (EFA), followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), to examine the number of factors that best captured these eight scores. We used previous results from a recent study by Hays et al. (Qual Life Res 27:1885-1891, 2018) to standardize scoring coefficients, normed to the general population. RESULTS: The mean age was 80.7, and 67% of participants were age 80 or older. Our results indicated a 2-factor solution, with these factors representing physical and mental HRQoL, respectively. We call these factors the physical health score (PHS) and the mental health score (MHS). We normed these summary scores to the general US population. The mean MHS for our population of was 50.1, similar to the US population, while the mean PHS was 42.2, almost a full standard deviation below the US population. CONCLUSIONS: We describe the adaptation of physical and mental health summary scores of the PROMIS-29 for use with a population of older adults with multiple chronic conditions.

Feasibility of Distinguishing Performance Among Provider Groups Using Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To examine minimum sample sizes and follow-up times required for patient-reported outcome-based performance measures (PMs) to achieve acceptable reliability as PMs. PARTICIPANTS: We used 2 groups of patients age 65+ with at least 2 of 13 chronic conditions. The first was a sample of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, who reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at baseline and 2 years. The second was a sample of primary care patients, who reported HRQoL at baseline and 6 months. MEASURES: Medicare Advantage beneficiaries completed the Veterans RAND 12-Item Short Form (VR-12), while the primary care sample completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-Item Profile Measure (PROMIS-29). We constructed binary candidate PMs indicating stable or improved physical or mental HRQoL at follow-up, and continuous PMs measuring mean change over time. RESULTS: In the Medicare Advantage sample, with a sample size per entity profiled of 160, the most promising PM achieved a reliability of 0.32 as a PM. A sample size of 882 per entity would have been needed for this PM to achieve an acceptable reliability of 0.7. In the prospective sample, with a sample size of 27 per clinic, the most promising PM achieved a reliability of 0.16 as a PM. A sample size of 341 patients (at the clinic level) would have been needed for this PM to achieve a reliability of 0.7. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving acceptable reliability for these PMs and conditions would have required minimum sample sizes of 341 at the clinic level or 880 at the health plan level. These estimates can guide the design of future patient-reported outcome-based PMs.

Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Performance Measures for Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions.

As measures of health care quality have become more sophisticated, the goals of patient care have expanded into helping patients optimize their functional status and well-being. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) based performance measures (PMs) can measure how well these aspects of care are being delivered and compare the performance of health care systems and different provider groups. Most PMs focus on technical quality of care or such outcomes as survival. For older adults, especially those over age 80 with multiple chronic conditions (MCC), it might be equally important or even more important to have a good quality of life. Therefore, policymakers and researchers have been particularly interested in designing PMs that reflect these patients' goals. To date, no PRO-based PMs have been formally developed or validated specifically for use in older adults with MCC. RAND analysts tested PMs that were based on two prominent instruments for assessing health-related quality of life: the Veterans RAND 36 Item Health Survey (VR-36) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-item (PROMIS-29) profile instrument. The PROMIS-29 is in widespread use but has undergone limited validation in a geriatric population with MCC. The study had two main aims: first, to validate the PROMIS-29 in this population, and second, to develop a better understanding of the practical use of PRO-based PMs in a geriatric population. To this end, the analysts assessed PM performance based on serial administration of the VR-36 or PROMIS-29, specifically in the MCC population studied.

Evaluating the PROMIS-29 v2.0 for use among older adults with multiple chronic conditions.

PURPOSE: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-item profile (PROMIS-29 v2.0), which measures health-related quality of life (HRQoL), has had limited evaluation among older adults (age 65+) with multiple chronic conditions. Our purpose was to establish convergent validity for PROMIS-29 in this population. METHODS: We collected the PROMIS-29 v2.0 and the Veterans RAND 36 (VR-36) for 1359 primary care patients aged 65 + with at least 2 of 13 chronic conditions, oversampling those aged 80+. We conducted multiple analyses to examine score differences across subgroups, differential item functioning (DIF), and comparisons of PROMIS-29 v2.0 and VR-36 scores. RESULTS: The mean age was 80.7, and all patients had at least 2 of 13 chronic conditions. Older age, female sex, Hispanic ethnicity, and more chronic conditions were associated with worse physical health scores (PHS) and mental health scores (MHS) on the PROMIS-29 v2.0-findings which are in the expected direction. None of the 700 pairs of items met criteria for DIF. PHS and MHS were highly intercorrelated (r = 0.74, p < 0.001 for this and all other findings). PHS was more highly correlated with the VR-36 Physical Component Score (PCS) than the Mental Component Score (MCS) (r = 0.85 and 0.32, respectively), while MHS was highly correlated with both (r = 0.70 and 0.64, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: PROMIS-29 v2.0 demonstrates expected bivariate relationships with key person-level characteristics and does not show DIF. PROMIS-29 v2.0 scores are highly correlated with VR-36 scores. These results provide support for the validity of PROMIS-29 v2.0 as a measure of HRQoL among older adults with multiple chronic conditions.

Evaluation of the Mental Health Services Act in Los Angeles County: Implementation and Outcomes for Key Programs.

Los Angeles County used Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds to greatly expand access to Full-Service Partnership (FSP) services and offer new prevention and early intervention (PEI) services. This study examines the reach of key MHSA-funded activities and what the impact of those activities has been, with a focus on PEI programs for children and transition-age youth (TAY) and FSP programs for children, TAY, and adults. The evaluation found evidence that the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health (LAC DMH) is reaching the highly vulnerable population it seeks to reach with its FSP and youth PEI programs. Furthermore, those reached by the programs experience improvements in their mental health and life circumstances. Refining data collection will enable more-thorough evaluation of processes of care and would inform the program's quality-improvement efforts.