IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002592.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing post-acute rehabilitation use, length of stay, and outcomes experienced by Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with hip fracture in the United States: A secondary analysis of administrative data

Author

Listed:
  • Amit Kumar
  • Momotazur Rahman
  • Amal N Trivedi
  • Linda Resnik
  • Pedro Gozalo
  • Vincent Mor

Abstract

Background: Medicare Advantage (MA) and Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) plans have different financial incentives. Medicare pays predetermined rates per beneficiary to MA plans for providing care throughout the year, while providers serving FFS patients are reimbursed per utilization event. It is unknown how these incentives affect post-acute care in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). The objective of this study was to examine differences in rehabilitation service use, length of stay, and outcomes for patients following hip fracture between FFS and MA enrollees. Methods and findings: This was a retrospective cohort study to examine differences in health service utilization and outcomes between FFS and MA patients in SNFs following hip fracture hospitalization during the period January 1, 2011, to June 30, 2015, and followed up until December 31, 2015. We linked the Master Beneficiary Summary File, Medicare Provider and Analysis Review data, Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set data, the Minimum Data Set, and the American Community Survey. The 6 primary outcomes of interest in this study included 2 process measures and 4 patient-centered outcomes. Process measures included length of stay in the SNF and average rehabilitation therapy minutes (physical and occupational therapy) received per day. Patient-centered outcomes included 30-day hospital readmission, changes in functional status as measured by the 28-point late loss MDS-ADL scale, likelihood of becoming a long-term resident, and successful discharge to the community. Successful discharge from a SNF was defined as being discharged to the community within 100 days of SNF admission and remaining alive in the community without being institutionalized in any acute or post-acute setting for at least 30 days. We analyzed 211,296 FFS and 75,554 MA patients with hip fracture admitted directly to a SNF following an index hospitalization who had not been in a nursing facility or hospital in the preceding year. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and nursing facility fixed effects regression models to compare treatments and outcomes between MA and FFS patients. MA patients were younger and less cognitively impaired upon SNF admission than FFS patients. After applying IPTW, demographic and clinical characteristics of MA patients were comparable with those of FFS patients. After adjusting for risk factors using IPTW-weighted fixed effects regression models, MA patients spent 5.1 (95% CI -5.4 to -4.8) fewer days in the SNF and received 463 (95% CI to -483.2 to -442.4) fewer minutes of total rehabilitation therapy during the first 40 days following SNF admission, i.e., 12.1 (95% CI -12.7 to -11.4) fewer minutes of rehabilitation therapy per day compared to FFS patients. In addition, MA patients had a 1.2 percentage point (95% CI -1.5 to -1.1) lower 30-day readmission rate, 0.6 percentage point (95% CI -0.8 to -0.3) lower rate of becoming a long-stay resident, and a 3.2 percentage point (95% CI 2.7 to 3.7) higher rate of successful discharge to the community compared to FFS patients. The major limitation of this study was that we only adjusted for observed differences to address selection bias between FFS and MA patients with hip fracture. Therefore, results may not be generalizable to other conditions requiring extensive rehabilitation. Conclusions: Compared to FFS patients, MA patients had a shorter course of rehabilitation but were more likely to be discharged to the community successfully and were less likely to experience a 30-day hospital readmission. Longer lengths of stay may not translate into better outcomes in the case of hip fracture patients in SNFs. In a retrospective analysis of Medicare data, Vincent Mor and colleagues compare outcomes for patients with hip fracture under different models of care.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Amit Kumar & Momotazur Rahman & Amal N Trivedi & Linda Resnik & Pedro Gozalo & Vincent Mor, 2018. "Comparing post-acute rehabilitation use, length of stay, and outcomes experienced by Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with hip fracture in the United States: A secondary a," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-14, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002592
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002592
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002592
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002592&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002592?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chiyoung Lee & Eleanor Schildwachter McConnell & Sijia Wei & Tingzhong (Michelle) Xue & Hideyo Tsumura & Wei Pan, 2022. "Effect of Race/ethnicity, Insurance Status, and Area Deprivation on Hip Fracture Outcomes Among Older Adults in the United States," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 31(3), pages 541-552, March.
    2. Liran Einav & Amy Finkelstein & Yunan Ji & Neale Mahoney, 2020. "Randomized trial shows healthcare payment reform has equal-sized spillover effects on patients not targeted by reform," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(32), pages 18939-18947, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002592. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.