7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Hospital quality reporting in the pandemic era: to what extent did hospitals’ COVID-19 census burdens impact 30-day mortality among non-COVID Medicare beneficiaries?

      other

      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

          Highly visible hospital quality reporting stakeholders in the USA such as the US News & World Report (USNWR) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) play an important health systems role via their transparent public reporting of hospital outcomes and performance. However, during the pandemic, many such quality measurement stakeholders and pay-for-performance programmes in the USA and Europe have eschewed the traditional risk adjustment paradigm, instead choosing to pre-emptively exclude months or years of pandemic era performance data due largely to hospitals’ perceived COVID-19 burdens. These data exclusions may lead patients to draw misleading conclusions about where to seek care, while also masking genuine improvements or deteriorations in hospital quality that may have occurred during the pandemic. Here, we assessed to what extent hospitals’ COVID-19 burdens (proportion of hospitalised patients with COVID-19) were associated with their non-COVID 30-day mortality rates from March through November 2020 to inform whether inclusion of pandemic-era data may still be appropriate.

          Design

          This was a retrospective cohort study using the 100% CMS Inpatient Standard Analytic File and Master Beneficiary Summary File to include all US Medicare inpatient encounters with admission dates from 1 April 2020 through 30 November 2020, excluding COVID-19 encounters. Using linear regression, we modelled the association between hospitals’ COVID-19 proportions and observed/expected (O/E) ratios, testing whether the relationship was non-linear. We calculated alternative hospital O/E ratios after selective pandemic data exclusions mirroring the USNWR data exclusion methodology.

          Setting and participants

          We analysed 4 182 226 consecutive Medicare inpatient encounters from across 2601 US hospitals.

          Results

          The association between hospital COVID-19 proportion and non-COVID O/E 30-day mortality was statistically significant (p<0.0001), but weakly correlated (r 2=0.06). The median (IQR) pairwise relative difference in hospital O/E ratios comparing the alternative analysis with the original analysis was +3.7% (−2.5%, +6.7%), with 1908/2571 (74.2%) of hospitals having relative differences within ±10%.

          Conclusions

          For non-COVID patient outcomes such as mortality, evidence-based inclusion of pandemic-era data is methodologically plausible and must be explored rather than exclusion of months or years of relevant patient outcomes data.

          Related collections

          Most cited references9

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP)

          (2024)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Balancing financial incentives during COVID-19: a comparison of provider payment adjustments across 20 countries

            Provider payment mechanisms were adjusted in many countries in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Our objective was to review adjustments for hospitals and healthcare professionals across 20 countries. We developed an analytical framework distinguishing between payment adjustments compensating income loss and those covering extra costs related to COVID-19. Information was extracted from the Covid-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM) and classified according to the framework. We found that income loss was not a problem in countries where professionals were paid by salary or capitation and hospitals received global budgets. In countries where payment was based on activity, income loss was compensated through budgets and higher fees. New FFS payments were introduced to incentivize remote services. Payments for COVID-19 related costs included new fees for out- and inpatient services but also new PD and DRG tariffs for hospitals. Budgets covered the costs of adjusting wards, creating new (ICU) beds, and hiring staff. We conclude that public payers assumed most of the COVID-19-related financial risk. In view of future pandemics policymakers should work to increase resilience of payment systems by: (1) having systems in place to rapidly adjust payment systems; (2) being aware of the economic incentives created by these adjustments such as cost-containment or increasing the number of patients or services, that can result in unintended consequences such as risk selection or overprovision of care; and (3) periodically evaluating the effects of payment adjustments on access and quality of care.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Trends in Adverse Event Rates in Hospitalized Patients, 2010-2019

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open Qual
                BMJ Open Qual
                bmjqir
                bmjoq
                BMJ Open Quality
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2399-6641
                2023
                21 March 2023
                21 March 2023
                : 12
                : 1
                : e002269
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentRobert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery , Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota, USA
                [2 ] departmentDepartment of Quality, Experience, and Affordability , Ringgold_6915Mayo Clinic , Rochester, Minnesota, USA
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Benjamin D Pollock; Pollock.Benjamin@ 123456Mayo.Edu
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4544-3158
                Article
                bmjoq-2023-002269
                10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002269
                10032135
                36944449
                b2fd8899-dc71-41ca-a43c-d9b6e1d595a9
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 17 January 2023
                : 10 March 2023
                Categories
                Research & Reporting Methodology
                1506
                2474
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                quality measurement,health services research,healthcare quality improvement

                Comments

                Comment on this article