In recent years direct ownership of physician practices by hospitals and health systems (that is, vertical integration) has become a prominent feature of the US health care system. One unexplored ...impact of vertical integration is the impact on referral patterns for common diagnostic tests and procedures and the associated spending. Using a 100 percent sample of 2013-16 Medicare fee-for-service claims data, we examined whether hospital and health system ownership of physician practices was associated with changes in site of care and Medicare reimbursement rates for ten common diagnostic imaging and laboratory services. After vertical integration, the monthly number of diagnostic imaging tests per 1,000 attributed beneficiaries performed in a hospital setting increased by 26.3 per 1,000, and the number performed in a nonhospital setting decreased by 24.8 per 1,000. Hospital-based laboratory tests increased by 44.5 per 1,000 attributed beneficiaries, and non-hospital-based laboratory tests decreased by 36.0 per 1,000. Average Medicare reimbursement rose by $6.38 for imaging tests and $0.57 for laboratory tests, which translates to $40.2 million and $32.9 million increases in Medicare spending, respectively, for the entire study period. This study highlights how the growing trend of vertical integration, combined with differences in Medicare payment between hospitals and nonhospital providers, leads to higher Medicare spending.
More than 100 rural hospitals have closed since 2010. Some rural hospitals have affiliated with health systems to improve their financial performance and potentially avoid closure, but the effects of ...affiliation on rural hospitals and their patients are unclear. To examine the relationship between affiliation and performance, we compared rural hospitals that affiliated with a health system in the period 2008–17 and a propensity score–weighted set of nonaffiliating rural hospitals on twelve measures of structure, utilization, financial performance, and quality. Following health system affiliation, rural hospitals experienced a significant reduction in on-site diagnostic imaging technologies, the availability of obstetric and primary care services, and outpatient nonemergency visits, as well as a significant increase in operating margins (by 1.6–3.6 percentage points from a baseline of −1.6 percent). Changes in patient experience scores, readmissions, and emergency department visits were similar for affiliating and nonaffiliating hospitals. While joining health systems may improve rural hospitals’ financial performance, affiliation may reduce access to services for patients in rural areas.
Following reductions in US ambulatory care early in the pandemic, it remains unclear whether care consistently returned to expected rates across insurance types and services.
To assess whether ...patients with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility had significantly lower than expected return to use of ambulatory care rates than patients with commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service insurance.
In this retrospective cohort study examining ambulatory care service patterns from January 1, 2019, through February 28, 2021, claims data from multiple US payers were combined using the Milliman MedInsight research database. Using a difference-in-differences design, the extent to which utilization during the pandemic differed from expected rates had the pandemic not occurred was estimated. Changes in utilization rates between January and February 2020 and each subsequent 2-month time frame during the pandemic were compared with the changes in the corresponding months from the year prior. Age- and sex-adjusted Poisson regression models of monthly utilization counts were used, offsetting for total patient-months and stratifying by service and insurance type.
Patients with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility compared with patients with commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service insurance, respectively.
Utilization rates per 100 people for 6 services: emergency department, office and urgent care, behavioral health, screening colonoscopies, screening mammograms, and contraception counseling or HIV screening.
More than 14.5 million US adults were included (mean age, 52.7 years; 54.9% women). In the March-April 2020 time frame, the combined use of 6 ambulatory services declined to 67.0% (95% CI, 66.9%-67.1%) of expected rates, but returned to 96.7% (95% CI, 96.6%-96.8%) of expected rates by the November-December 2020 time frame. During the second COVID-19 wave in the January-February 2021 time frame, overall utilization again declined to 86.2% (95% CI, 86.1%-86.3%) of expected rates, with colonoscopy remaining at 65.0% (95% CI, 64.1%-65.9%) and mammography at 79.2% (95% CI, 78.5%-79.8%) of expected rates. By the January-February 2021 time frame, overall utilization returned to expected rates as follows: patients with Medicaid at 78.4% (95% CI, 78.2%-78.7%), Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility at 73.3% (95% CI, 72.8%-73.8%), commercial at 90.7% (95% CI, 90.5%-90.9%), Medicare Advantage at 83.2% (95% CI, 81.7%-82.2%), and Medicare fee-for-service at 82.0% (95% CI, 81.7%-82.2%; P < .001; comparing return to expected utilization rates among patients with Medicaid and Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility, respectively, with each of the other insurance types).
Between March 2020 and February 2021, aggregate use of 6 ambulatory care services increased after the preceding decrease in utilization that followed the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the rate of increase in use of these ambulatory care services was significantly lower for participants with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility than for those insured by commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service.
Payers and policymakers are rewarding high-performing health care providers on the basis of summaries of overall quality performance, and the methods they use for measuring performance are ...increasingly important.
To develop and evaluate a measure that ranks health care systems by ambulatory care quality.
Systems were ranked using a composite model that summarizes individual measures of quality, accounts for their correlation, and does not require health care systems to report every measure. The composite measure's suitability was evaluated by examining whether it captured the quality indicated by component measures (validity), whether differences in rank between health care systems were larger than statistical noise (reliability), and whether year-to-year changes in rank were small (stability).
California and Minnesota, 2014 to 2016.
55 health care systems.
Publicly reported measures of ambulatory care quality.
The composite measure was valid in that it was broadly representative of the component measures and was not dominated by any single measure. The measure was reliable because the ranks for 93% of California systems and 80% of Minnesota systems were unlikely to be more than 2 places lower or higher. The measure was stable because fewer than half of systems changed ranks by more than 2 ranks from year to year.
The analysis is limited to available measures of ambulatory care quality and includes only 2 states.
This composite measure uses publicly reported data to produce valid, reliable, and stable ranks of ambulatory care quality for health care systems in Minnesota and California, and this approach could be used in other applications.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
BACKGROUND
Older adults are particularly vulnerable to complications from proton pump inhibitor (PPI) drugs. We sought to characterize the prevalence of potentially low‐value PPI prescriptions among ...older adults to inform a quality improvement (QI) intervention.
METHODS
We created a cohort of patients, aged 65 years or older, receiving primary care at a large academic health system in 2018. We identified patients currently prescribed any PPI using the electronic health record (EHR) medication list (current defined as September 1, 2018). A geriatrician, a gastroenterologist, a QI expert, and two primary care physicians (PCPs) created multidisciplinary PPI appropriateness criteria based on evidenced‐based guidelines. Supervised by a gastroenterologist and PCP, two internal medicine residents conducted manual chart reviews in a random sample of 399 patients prescribed PPIs. We considered prescriptions potentially low value if they lacked a guideline‐based (1) short‐term indication (gastroesophageal reflux disease GERD/peptic ulcer disease/Helicobacter pylori gastritis/dyspepsia) or (2) long‐term (>8 weeks) indication (severe/refractory GERD/erosive esophagitis/Barrett esophagus/esophageal adenocarcinoma/esophageal stricture/high gastrointestinal bleeding risk/Zollinger‐Ellison syndrome). We used the Wilson score method to calculate 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on low‐value PPI prescription prevalence.
RESULTS
Among 69 352 older adults, 8729 (12.6%) were prescribed a PPI. In the sample of 399 patients prescribed PPIs, 63.9% were female; their mean age was 76.2 years, and they were seen by 169 PCPs. Of the 399 prescriptions, 143 (35.8%; 95% CI = 31.3%‐40.7%) were potentially low value—of which 82% began appropriately (eg, GERD) but then continued long term without a guideline‐based indication. Among 169 PCPs, 32 (18.9%) contributed to 59.2% of potentially low‐value prescriptions.
CONCLUSION
One in eight older adults were prescribed a PPI, and over one‐third of prescriptions were potentially low‐value. Most often, appropriate short‐term prescriptions became potentially low value because they lacked long‐term indications. With most potentially low‐value prescribing concentrated among a small subset of PCPs, interventions targeting them and/or applying EHR‐based automatic stopping rules may protect older adults from harm. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2600–2604, 2019
Community health centers (CHCs) historically have reported challenges obtaining specialty care for their patients, but recent policy changes, including Medicaid eligibility expansions under the ...Affordable Care Act, may have improved access to specialty care. The objective of this study was to assess current levels of difficulty accessing specialty care for CHC patients, by insurance type, and to identify specific barriers and strategies that CHCs are using to overcome these barriers.
Cross-sectional survey, administered during summer 2017, of medical directors at CHCs in 9 states and the District of Columbia, all of which expanded Medicaid.
Surveys were administered to medical directors at 361 CHCs (response rate, 55%) to assess the difficulty of accessing specialty care by insurance type and to identify the specialties for which it was most difficult to obtain new patient visits. The survey also elicited ratings of commonly reported barriers to obtaining specialty care and identified strategies used by CHCs to access specialty care for patients. Descriptive results are presented.
Nearly 60% of CHCs reported difficulty obtaining new patient specialty visits for their Medicaid patients, most often for orthopedists. Barriers to specialty care reported by CHCs included that few specialists in Medicaid managed care organization (MCO) networks were accepting new patients (69.4%) and MCO administrative requirements for obtaining specialist consults (49.0%). To enhance access to specialists, CHCs reported that they entered into referral agreements, developed appointment reminder systems, and participated in data exchange and other community-based initiatives.
Medicaid patients at CHCs face many barriers to accessing specialty care. Payment policies and network adequacy rules may need to be reexamined to address these challenges.
Black-White disparities in cardiac care may be related to physician referral network segregation. We developed and tested new geographic physician network segregation measures. We used Medicare ...claims to identify Black and White Medicare heart disease patients and map physician networks for 169 hospital referral regions (HRRs) with over 1000 Black patients. We constructed two network segregation indexes ranging from 0 (integration) to 100 (total segregation): Dissimilarity (the unevenness of Black and White patient distribution across physicians Dn) and Absolute Clustering (the propensity of Black patients’ physicians to have closer ties with each other than with other physicians ACLn). We employed conditional logit models to estimate the probability of using the best (lowest mortality) geographically available hospital for Black and White patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery in 126 markets with sufficient sample size at increasing levels of network segregation and for low vs. high HRR Black patient population. Physician network segregation was lower than residential segregation (Dissimilarity 21.9 vs. 48.7, and Absolute Clustering 4.8 vs. 32.4) and positively correlated with residential segregation (p < .001). Network segregation effects differed by race and HRR Black patient population. For White patients, higher network segregation was associated with a higher probability of using the best available hospitals in HRRs with few black patients but unchanged (ACLn) or lower (Dn) probability of best hospital use in HRRs with many Black patients. For Black patients, higher network segregation was not associated with a substantial change in the probability of best hospital use regardless of the HRR Black patient population size. Measuring physician network segregation is feasible and associated with nuanced effects on Black-White differences in high-quality hospital use for heart disease. Further work is needed to understand underlying mechanisms and potential uses in health equity policy.
•Novel methods measure physician network segregation in healthcare markets.•Network segregation is well correlated with residential segregation.•Its relationship with best hospital use for open heart surgery varies by race.•Network segregation may improve White patients' high-quality hospital use.•Network segregation does not influence Black patients' high-quality hospital use.
The COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) caused substantial changes in hospital operations. The net effect of these changes on hospital financial performance is unclear.
To evaluate changes in ...hospital financial performance before and during the COVID-19 PHE.
This longitudinal within-hospital cohort analysis from 2017 to 2021 used national RAND hospital data merged with American Community Survey data. A total of 4223 short-term acute care or critical access hospitals in the US with financial data spanning 2017 to 2021 were evaluated.
Financial performance during the first 2 years of the PHE.
The main outcome was PHE financial distress calculated based on net operating income (operating revenue minus operating expenses). Within-hospital changes in net operating income over time were evaluated with and without COVID-19 relief funding. From henceforth, 2020/2021 means the weighted average financial performance for both calendar year 2020 and 2021. Hospitals were characterized as having new financial distress if (1) their average 2020/2021 net operating income was negative and (2) the average 2020/2021 net operating income was less than that hospital's pre-2020 net operating income. Predictors of new financial distress were evaluated using logistic regression and predictors of COVID-19 relief using 2-part models.
In this sample of 4423 hospitals, 3529 (80.0%) received PHE funds during 2020/2021. A total of 846 (19.1%) were located in a census tract with more than 20% Hispanic residents. Of the total number of hospitals, 720 (16.3%) of hospitals had PHE financial distress, whereas 2047 (46.3%) had PHE financial distress after excluding COVID-19 relief funding from net operating income. The majority of hospitals (n = 3337; 74.8%) had a positive net operating income across 2020/2021, with 785 (17.8%) hospitals moving from a negative pre-2020 to a positive 2020/2021 net operating income. In adjusted analyses, hospitals treating a higher proportion of Hispanic populations were more likely to have PHE distress (adjusted odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6; P = .02). Median (IQR) operating margins from 2020/2021 were at an all-time high of 6.5% (0.2%-13.3%) compared with pre-2020 operating margins of 2.8% (-2.8% to 9.3%).
In this cohort study of US hospitals, the large majority had positive financial performance during 2020/2021, partly due to COVID-19 relief funds. However, hospitals serving Hispanic populations had substantially worsened financial performance during 2020/2021, even after accounting for COVID-19 relief. That COVID-19 relief funding aided in operating margins reaching all-time highs indicates funding amounts may have been larger than was necessary for many hospitals. With COVID-19 relief funding ending yet COVID-19 related continuing to affect hospital expenses, ongoing monitoring of hospital financial performance is vital to ensure patients retain access to care.
PDF
