3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      High-Need Phenotypes in Medicare Beneficiaries: Drivers of Variation in Utilization and Outcomes

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          OBJECTIVES

          High-need (HN) Medicare beneficiaries heavily use healthcare services at a high cost. This population is heterogeneous, composed of individuals with varying degrees of medical complexity and healthcare needs. To improve healthcare delivery and decrease costs, it is critical to identify the subpopulations present within this population. We aimed to (1) identify distinct clinical phenotypes present within HN Medicare beneficiaries, and (2) examine differences in outcomes between phenotypes.

          DESIGN

          Latent class analysis was used to identify phenotypes within a sample of HN fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older using Medicare claims and post-acute assessment data.

          SETTING

          Not applicable.

          PARTICIPANTS

          Two cross-sectional cohorts were used to identify phenotypes. Cohorts included FFS Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older who survived through 2014 (n = 415 659) and 2015 (n = 416 643).

          MEASUREMENTS

          The following variables were used to identify phenotypes: acute and post-acute care use, functional dependency in one or more activities of daily living, presence of six or more chronic conditions, and complex chronic conditions. Mortality, hospitalizations, healthcare expenditures, and days in the community were compared between phenotypes.

          RESULTS

          Five phenotypes were identified: (1) comorbid ischemic heart disease with hospitalization and skilled nursing facility use (22% of the HN sample), (2) comorbid ischemic heart disease with home care use (23%), (3) home care use (12%), (4) high comorbidity with hospitalization (32%), and (5) Alzheimer’s disease/related dementias with functional dependency and nursing home use (11%). Mortality was highest in phenotypes 1 and 2; hospitalizations and expenditures were highest in phenotypes 1, 3, and 4.

          CONCLUSIONS

          Our findings represent a first step toward classifying the heterogeneity among HN Medicare beneficiaries. Further work is needed to identify modifiable utilization patterns between phenotypes to improve the value of healthcare provided to these subpopulations.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Caring for High-Need, High-Cost Patients - An Urgent Priority.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Segmenting high-cost Medicare patients into potentially actionable cohorts.

            Providers are assuming growing responsibility for healthcare spending, and prior studies have shown that spending is concentrated in a small proportion of patients. Using simple methods to segment these patients into clinically meaningful subgroups may be a useful and accessible strategy for targeting interventions to control costs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Subgroups of High-Cost Medicare Advantage Patients: an Observational Study

              There is a growing focus on improving the quality and value of health care delivery for high-cost patients. Compared to fee-for-service Medicare, less is known about the clinical composition of high-cost Medicare Advantage populations. To describe a high-cost Medicare Advantage population and identify clinically and operationally significant subgroups of patients. We used a density-based clustering algorithm to group high-cost patients (top 10% of spending) according to 161 distinct demographic, clinical, and claims-based variables. We then examined rates of utilization, spending, and mortality among subgroups. Sixty-one thousand five hundred forty-six Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. Spending, utilization, and mortality. High-cost patients ( n  = 6154) accounted for 55% of total spending. High-cost patients were more likely to be younger, male, and have higher rates of comorbid illnesses. We identified ten subgroups of high-cost patients: acute exacerbations of chronic disease (mixed); end-stage renal disease (ESRD); recurrent gastrointestinal bleed (GIB); orthopedic trauma (trauma); vascular disease (vascular); surgical infections and other complications (complications); cirrhosis with hepatitis C (liver); ESRD with increased medical and behavioral comorbidity (ESRD+); cancer with high-cost imaging and radiation therapy (oncology); and neurologic disorders (neurologic). The average number of inpatient days ranged from 3.25 (oncology) to 26.09 (trauma). Preventable spending (as a percentage of total spending) ranged from 0.8% (oncology) to 9.5% (complications) and the percentage of spending attributable to prescription medications ranged from 7.9% (trauma and oncology) to 77.0% (liver). The percentage of patients who were persistently high-cost ranged from 11.8% (trauma) to 100.0% (ESRD+). One-year mortality ranged from 0.0% (liver) to 25.8% (ESRD+). We identified clinically distinct subgroups of patients within a heterogeneous high-cost Medicare Advantage population using cluster analysis. These subgroups, defined by condition-specific profiles and illness trajectories, had markedly different patterns of utilization, spending, and mortality, holding important implications for clinical strategy. The online version of this article (10.1007/s11606-018-4759-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                7503062
                4443
                J Am Geriatr Soc
                J Am Geriatr Soc
                Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
                0002-8614
                1532-5415
                22 September 2019
                27 August 2019
                January 2020
                10 January 2020
                : 68
                : 1
                : 70-77
                Affiliations
                [* ]Center for Gerontology and Healthcare Research, Brown University, School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island
                []Department of Health Services, Policy & Practice, Brown University, School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island
                []Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior & Neurology, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
                Author notes

                Author Contributions: Study concept and design: Keeney, Belanger, Jones, and Mor. Statistical analysis: Keeney and Belanger. Interpretation of data and preparation of manuscript: All authors.

                Address correspondence to Tamra Keeney, PhD, Brown University School of Public Health, 121 South Main Street, 6th Floor, Providence, RI 02903. tamra_keeney@ 123456brown.edu ; Twitter: @tamrakeeney
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2603-8707
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4081-1751
                Article
                HHSPA1051467
                10.1111/jgs.16146
                6952536
                31454082
                967bea37-d0ee-4f9a-9f54-d3a15791f3e4

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Geriatric medicine
                health services,outcomes,multimorbidity,latent class analysis
                Geriatric medicine
                health services, outcomes, multimorbidity, latent class analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article