Beyond classic risk adjustment: Socioeconomic status and hospital performance in urologic oncology surgery

Social Risk Adjustment In The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program: A Systematic Review And Implications For Policy

Value-based payment programs adjust payments to providers based on spending, quality, or health outcomes. Concern that these programs penalize providers disproportionately serving vulnerable patients prompted calls to adjust performance measures for social risk factors. We reviewed fourteen studies of social risk adjustment in Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), a value-based payment model that initially did not adjust for social risk factors but subsequently began to do so. Seven studies found that adding social risk factors to the program's base risk-adjustment model (which adjusts only for age, sex, and comorbidities) reduced differences in risk-adjusted readmissions and penalties between safety-net hospitals and other hospitals. Three studies found that peer grouping, the HRRP's current approach to social risk adjustment, reduced penalties among safety-net hospitals. Two studies found that differences in risk-adjusted readmissions and penalties were further narrowed when augmentation of the base model was combined with peer grouping. Two studies showed that it is possible to adjust for social risk factors without obscuring quality differences between hospitals. These findings support the use of social risk adjustment to improve provider payment equity and highlight opportunities to enhance social risk adjustment in value-based payment programs.

U.S. hospital performance methodologies: a scoping review to identify opportunities for crossing the quality chasm

Background

Hospital performance quality assessments inform patients, providers, payers, and purchasers in making healthcare decisions. These assessments have been developed by government, private and non-profit organizations, and academic institutions. Given the number and variability in available assessments, a knowledge gap exists regarding what assessments are available and how each assessment measures quality to identify top performing hospitals. This study aims to: (a) comprehensively identify current hospital performance assessments, (b) compare quality measures from each methodology in the context of the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) six domains of STEEEP (safety, timeliness, effectiveness, efficiency, equitable, and patient-centeredness), and (c) formulate policy recommendations that improve value-based, patient-centered care to address identified gaps.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted using a systematic search of MEDLINE and the grey literature along with handsearching to identify studies that provide assessments of US-based hospital performance whereby the study cohort examined a minimum of 250 hospitals in the last two years (2017–2019).

Results

From 3058 unique records screened, 19 hospital performance assessments met inclusion criteria. Methodologies were analyzed across each assessment and measures were mapped to STEEEP. While safety and effectiveness were commonly identified measures across assessments, efficiency, and patient-centeredness were less frequently represented. Equity measures were also limited to risk- and severity-adjustment methods to balance patient characteristics across populations, rather than stand-alone indicators to evaluate health disparities that may contribute to community-level inequities.

Conclusions

To further improve health and healthcare value-based decision-making, there remains a need for methodological transparency across assessments and the standardization of consensus-based measures that reflect the IOM’s quality framework. Additionally, a large opportunity exists to improve the assessment of health equity in the communities that hospitals serve.

Outcomes of upper tract urothelial carcinoma with isolated lymph node involvement following surgical resection: implications for multi-modal management

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the oncologic outcomes of upper tract urothelial carcinoma with isolated lymph node (LN) involvement (pN+ M0) following surgical resection. We examined pN+ M0 UTUC in a large, nationwide oncology dataset to characterize its natural history, describe trends in utilization of perioperative chemotherapy, and identify clinicopathologic features associated with survival.

METHODS

We identified 794 patients aged 18-89 years who underwent radical nephroureterectomy with lymph node dissection for pN+ M0 UTUC from 2006 to 2013 in the National Cancer Database. The associations of clinicopathologic features with overall survival (OS) were evaluated using Cox regression models, and a simplified risk score was created.

RESULTS

Median follow-up among survivors was 39.5 months, during which time 555 (70%) patients died. Over the study period, neoadjuvant chemotherapy utilization increased from 6.7 to 14.2% (p = 0.002), while adjuvant chemotherapy utilization remained stable (42.7 to 44.3%; p = 0.86). One-, 5-, and 8-year OS rates were 63.7%, 24.2%, and 18.7%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, older age, larger tumor size, higher pT stage, positive surgical margins, number of positive LNs, and non-receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy were independently associated with worse OS. A simplified risk score consisting of age, tumor size, pT stage, number of positive LNs, and margin status was created with predicted 5-year OS ranging from 12 to 44%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, contemporary cohort, pN+ M0 UTUC was associated with a 5-year OS of only 24%. Clinicopathologic predictors of survival after surgical resection may improve risk-stratification, counseling, and selection of patients for multimodal management.

Quality of Care and Outcomes of Patients With Gynecologic Malignancies Treated at Safety-Net Hospitals

Background

Although safety-net hospitals (SNH) provide a valuable role serving vulnerable patients, the quality of gynecologic oncology care at these hospitals remains inadequately documented. We examined the quality of care at SNH for women with gynecologic cancers.

Methods

We used the National Cancer Database to identify hospitals that treated patients with uterine, ovarian, or cervical cancer from 2004 to 2015. Hospitals with the greatest proportion of uninsured patients or Medicaid beneficiaries were defined as SNH. Quality metrics were derived from evidence-based recommendations. Thirty-day mortality, readmission rates, and 5-year survival were calculated. Multivariable models were developed to determine the association between treatment at SNH and outcomes.

Results

Overall, 594 750 patients diagnosed with gynecologic cancer were treated at 1340 hospitals. Compared with non-SNH, patients at SNH were younger, more frequently racial minorities, low income, and had more aggressive histologies and advanced-stage tumors. SNH had lower rates of minimally invasive surgery for uterine cancer (62.3% vs 75.9%, P < .0001), debulking for ovarian cancer (83.6% vs 86.9%, P < .05), and lymph node assessment for all three cancer types (P < .05). Rates of chemotherapy for uterine and ovarian cancer was greater whereas concurrent chemoradiation for cervical cancer was lower (P < .05 for all). Thirty-day mortality and readmission rates were equivalent. Mortality was moderately worse for patients with stage IV ovarian cancer and stage II-III cervical cancer (P < .05) but were otherwise equivalent.

Conclusions

After adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, women with gynecologic cancers treated at SNH receive lower-quality surgical care and equivalent medical care and a subset of these patients has modest decreases in survival.