Comparison Of Hospitals Participating In Medicare's Voluntary And Mandatory Orthopedic Bundle Programs

Differential Hospital Participation in Bundled Payments in Communities with Higher Shares of Marginalized Populations

BACKGROUND

Medicare's voluntary bundled payment programs have demonstrated generally favorable results. However, it remains unknown whether uneven hospital participation in these programs in communities with greater shares of minorities and patients of low socioeconomic status results in disparate access to practice redesign innovations.

OBJECTIVE

Examine whether communities with higher proportions of marginalized individuals were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-Advanced).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using ordinary least squares regression controlling for patient and community factors.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicare fee-for-service patients enrolled from 2015-2017 (pre-BPCI-Advanced) and residing in 2,058 local communities nationwide defined by Hospital Service Areas (HSAs). Each community's share of marginalized patients was calculated separately for each of the share of beneficiaries of Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, or dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid.

MAIN MEASURES

Dichotomous variable indicating whether a given community had at least one hospital that ever participated in BPCI-Advanced from 2018-2022.

KEY RESULTS

Communities with higher shares of dual-eligible individuals were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced than communities with the lowest quartile of dual-eligible individuals (Q4: -15.1 percentage points [pp] lower than Q1, 95% CI: -21.0 to -9.1, p < 0.001). There was no consistent significant relationship between community proportion of Black beneficiaries and likelihood of having a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced. Communities with higher shares of Hispanic beneficiaries were more likely to have a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced than those in the lowest quartile (Q4: 19.2 pp higher than Q1, 95% CI: 13.4 to 24.9, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Communities with greater shares of dual-eligible beneficiaries, but not racial or ethnic minorities, were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced Policymakers should consider approaches to incentivize more socioeconomically uniform participation in voluntary bundled payments.

Association Between Hospital Participation in Value-Based Programs and Timely Initiation of Post-Acute Home Health Care, Functional Recovery, and Hospital Readmission After Joint Replacement

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the association between hospital participation in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) or Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) and the timely initiation of home health rehabilitation services for lower extremity joint replacements. Furthermore, this study examined the association between the timely initiation of home health rehabilitation services with improvement in self-care, mobility, and 90-day hospital readmission.

METHOD

This retrospective cohort study used Medicare inpatient claims and home health assessment data from 2016 to 2017 for older adults discharged to home with home health following hospitalization after joint replacement. Multilevel multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the association between hospital participation in BPCI or CJR programs and timely initiation of home health rehabilitation service. A 2-staged generalized boosted model was used to examine the association between delay in home health initiation and improvement in self-care, mobility, and 90-day risk-adjusted hospital readmission.

RESULTS

Compared with patients discharged from hospitals that did not have BPCI or CJR, patients discharged from hospitals with these programs had a lower likelihood of delayed initiation of home health rehabilitation services for both knees and hip replacement. Using propensity scores as the inverse probability of treatment weights, delay in the initiation of home health rehabilitation services was associated with lower improvement in self-care (odds ratio [OR] = 1.23; 95% CI = 1.20-1.26), mobility (OR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.13-1.18), and higher rate of 90-day hospital readmission (OR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.15-1.24) for knee replacement. Likewise, delayed initiation of home health rehabilitation services was associated with lower improvement in self-care (OR = 1.16; 95% CI = 1.13-1.20) and mobility (OR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.22-1.30) for hip replacement.

CONCLUSION

Hospital participation in BPCI or comprehensive CJR was associated with early home health rehabilitation care initiation, which was further associated with significant increases in functional recovery and lower risks of hospital readmission.

IMPACT

Policy makers may consider incentivizing health care providers to initiate early home health services and care coordination in value-based payment models.

Increased Complications and Cost Associated With Hip Arthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture: Evaluation of 576,119 Medicare Patients Treated With Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The benefit of total hip arthroplasty (THA) for treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) and femoral neck fractures (FNFs) in the geriatric population is well established. We compare perioperative complications and cost of THA for treatment of OA to hemiarthroplasty (HA) and THA for treatment of FNF.

METHODS

Data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were used to identify all patients 65 years and older undergoing primary hip arthroplasty between 2013 and 2017. Patients were divided into 3 cohorts: THA for OA (n = 326,313), HA for FNF (n = 223,811), and THA for FNF (n = 25,995). Generalized regressions were used to compare group mortality, 90-day readmission, thromboembolic events, and 90-day episode costs, controlling for age, gender, race, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Compared to patients treated for OA, FNF patients were older and had significantly more comorbidities (all P < .001). Even among the youngest age group (65-69 years) without comorbidities, FNF was associated with a greater risk of mortality at 90 days (THA-FNF odds ratio [OR] 9.3, HA-FNF OR 27.0, P < .001), 1 year (THA-FNF OR 7.8, HA-FNF OR 19.0, P < .001) and 5 years (THA-FNF hazard ratio 4.5, HA-FNF hazard ratio 10.0, P < .001). The average 90-day direct cost was $12,479 and $14,036 greater among THA and HA for FNF respectively compared to THA for OA (all P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Among Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services hip arthroplasty patients, those with an FNF had significantly higher rates of mortality, thromboembolic events, readmission, and greater direct cost. Reimbursement models for arthroplasty should account for the distinctly different perioperative complication and resource utilization for FNF patients.

Incorporating patient-reported outcomes into shared decision-making in the management of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a major clinical and public health concern. The primary surgical treatment of knee OA is total knee replacement (TKR), a procedure that aims to alleviate pain and restore physical function. TKR is expensive, however, and based on professional guidelines, inappropriately performed in up to a third of patients. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) help evaluate treatment options by quantifying health outcomes that matter to patients and can thus inform shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and health professionals.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a US-based 2-year, two-site hybrid type 1 study to assess clinical effectiveness and implementation of a machine learning-based patient decision aid (PDA) integrating patient-reported outcomes and clinical variables to support SDM for patients with knee OA considering TKR. Substudy 1: At one study site, a randomised controlled trial is evaluating the clinical effectiveness of the PDA and SDM process on decision quality as measured after the baseline consultation and treatment choice measured 3 and 6 months after the baseline visit among 200 patients with knee OA. Substudy 2: At a second study site, a qualitative assessment using principles of behaviour design and intervention mapping is evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of the PROMs, PDA and SDM process by interviewing seven health professionals and 25 patients before and 25 patients after PDA implementation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been obtained from The University of Texas at Austin Institutional Review Board (protocol number: 2018-11-0042). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Study results will be disseminated through conference presentations, publications and professional societies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04805554.

Impact of Hospital-Based Rehabilitation Services on Discharge to the Community by Value-Based Payment Programs After Joint Replacement Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of hospital-based rehabilitation services on community discharge rates after hip and knee replacement surgery according to hospital participation in value-based care models: bundled payments for care improvement (BPCI) and comprehensive care for joint replacement (CJR). The secondary objective was to determine whether community discharge rates after hip and knee replacement surgery differed by participation in these models.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of Medicare fee-for-service claims was conducted for beneficiaries 65 years of age or older who underwent hip and knee replacement surgery from 2016 to 2017. Independent variables were hospital participation in value-based programs categorized as: (1) BPCI, (2) CJR, and (3) non-BPCI/CJR; and total minutes per day of hospital-based rehabilitation services categorized into tertiles. The primary outcome variable was discharged to the community versus discharged to institutional post-acute care settings. The association between rehabilitation amount and community discharge among BPCI, CJR, and non-BPCI/CJR hospitals was adjusted for patient-level clinical and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Participation in BPCI or CJR was not associated with community discharge. This analysis found a dose-response relationship between the amount of rehabilitation services and odds of community discharge. Among those who received a hip replacement, this relationship was most pronounced in the BPCI group; compared with the low rehabilitation category, the medium category had odds ratio (OR) = 1.28 (95% CI = 1.17 to 1.41), and the high category had OR = 1.90 (95% CI = 1.71 to 2.11). For those who received a knee replacement, there was a dose-response relationship in the CJR group only; compared with the low rehabilitation category, the medium category had OR = 1.21 (95% CI = 1.15 to 1.28), and the high category had OR = 1.56 (95% CI = 1.46 to 1.66).

CONCLUSION

Regardless of hospital participation in BPCI or CJR models, higher amounts of rehabilitation services delivered during acute hospitalization is associated with a higher likelihood of discharge to community following hip and knee replacement surgery.

IMPACT

In the era of value-based care, frontloading of rehabilitation care is vital for improving patient-centered health outcomes in acute phases of lower extremity joint replacement.

A Comprehensive Monetary Analysis of Inpatient Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasties Billed to Medicare by Hospitals: 2011-2017

BACKGROUND

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has been a recent target of reimbursement reform. As such, the purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in Medicare reimbursement to hospitals for TJA patients from 2011 to 2017.

METHODS

The Inpatient Utilization and Payment Public Use File was queried for all primary total hip and knee arthroplasty episodes. This file includes all services billed to Medicare via the Inpatient Prospective Payment System. Extracted data included hospital charges and amount paid by Medicare. All data were adjusted for inflation to 2017 US dollars. Multiple linear mixed-model regression analyses were conducted to assess change over time, and geo-modelling was used to represent reimbursement by location.

RESULTS

A total of 3,368,924 primary TJA procedures were billed to Medicare by hospitals from 2011 to 2017 and included in the study. The mean inflation-adjusted Medicare payment to hospitals for DRG 469 decreased from $22,783.66 to $19,604.62 per procedure (-$3179.04; -14.0%; P < .001) and decreased from $13,290.79 to $11,771.54 for DRG 470 (-$1519.25; -11.4%, P = .011) from 2011 to 2017. Meanwhile, the mean charge submitted by hospitals increased by $6483.39 and $5115.60 for DRGs 469 and 470, respectively (+7.4% for 469, +9.3% for 470; P < .001). Medicare reimbursement to hospitals varied by state.

CONCLUSION

During the study period, the mean Medicare reimbursement to hospitals decreased for TJA from 2011 to 2017. Meanwhile, the average charge submitted by hospitals increased. As alternative payment models continue to undergo evaluation and development, these data are important for the advancement of more agreeable reimbursement models in arthroplasty care.

The Impact of Simultaneous Hospital Participation in Accountable Care Organizations and Bundled Payments on Episode Outcomes

Among hospitals accepting bundled payments, simultaneous "co-participation" in accountable care organizations (ACOs) could impact episode outcomes compared to bundled payment participation alone. Difference-in-differences (DID) analysis of 1 857 653 ACO-attributed Medicare beneficiaries. The study exposure was hospitalization for 24 procedure-based and 24 condition-based episodes at hospitals participating in bundled payments and ACOs (co-participant) versus only bundled payments. Study outcomes included episode quality, postacute utilization, and spending. For procedure-based episodes, patients hospitalized at co-participant and bundled payment hospitals did not exhibit differential changes in risk-adjusted mortality (DID 0.04 percentage points [p.p.], 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.28 p.p. to 0.37 p.p., P = 0.79), readmissions (DID -0.32 p.p., 95% CI -1.5 p.p. to 0.82 p.p., P = 0.59), postdischarge institutional spending (DID $119, 95% CI -$216 to $455, P = 0.49), or postacute utilization. Similarly, outcomes for condition-based episodes did not vary between co-participant and bundled payment hospitals. Payment model co-participation may produce neither synergistic benefits nor negative effects for patients.

Nationwide Hospital Performance on Publicly Reported Episode Spending Measures

BACKGROUND

Medicare has implemented strategies to improve value by containing hospital spending for episodes of care. Compared with payment models, publicly reported episode-based spending measures are underrecognized strategies.

OBJECTIVE

To provide the first nationwide description of hospitals' episode-based spending based on publicly reported Clinical Episode-Based Payment (CEBP) measures.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We used 2017 Hospital Compare data to assess spending on six CEBPs among 1,778 hospitals. We examined spending variation and its drivers, correlation between CEBPs, and spending by cost performance categories (for individual CEBPs, below vs above average spending; for across-CEBP comparisons, high vs low vs mixed cost). We also compared hospital spending performance on CEBPs with a global Medicare Spending Per Beneficiary measure.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Episode spending.

RESULTS

Episode spending varied by CEBP type, with skilled nursing facility (SNF) care accounting for the majority of spending variation for procedural episodes but not for condition episodes. Across CEBPs, greater proportions of episode spending were attributed to SNF care at high-(18.1%) vs mixed-(10.7%) vs low-cost (9.2%) hospitals (P > .001). There was low within-hospital CEBP correlation and low correlation and concordance between hospitals' CEBP and Medicare Spending Per Beneficiary performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Variation reduction and savings opportunities in SNF care for procedural episodes suggest that they may be better suited for existing payment models than condition episodes are. Spending performance was not hospital specific, which highlights the potential utility of episode spending measures beyond global measures.

An Employer-Provider Direct Payment Program Is Associated With Lower Episode Costs

Bundled payment has shown promise in reducing medical spending while maintaining quality. However, its impact among commercially insured populations has not been well studied. We examined the impacts on episode cost and patient cost sharing of a program that applies bundled payments for orthopedic and surgical procedures in a commercially insured population. The program we studied negotiates preferred prices for selected providers that cover the procedure and all related care within a thirty-day period after the procedure and waives cost sharing for patients who receive care from these providers. After implementation, episode prices for three selected surgical procedures declined by $4,229, a 10.7 percent relative reduction. Employers captured approximately 85 percent of the savings, or $3,582 per episode (a 9.5 percent relative decrease), and patient cost-sharing payments decreased by $498 per episode (a 27.7 percent relative decrease).

Spillover Effects of Medicare's Voluntary Bundled Payments for Joint Replacement Surgery to Patients Insured by Commercial Health Plans

BACKGROUND

Under the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program, bundled paymtents for lower-extremity joint replacement (LEJR) are associated with 2% to 4% cost savings with stable quality among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. However, BPCI may prompt practice changes that benefit all patients, not just fee-for-service beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between hospital participation in BPCI and LEJR outcomes for patients with commercial insurance or Medicare Advantage (MA).

DESIGN

Quasi-experimental study using Health Care Cost Institute claims from 2011 to 2016.

SETTING

LEJR at 281 BPCI hospitals and 562 non-BPCI hospitals.

PATIENTS

184 922 patients with MA or commercial insurance.

MEASUREMENTS

Differential changes in LEJR outcomes at BPCI hospitals versus at non-BPCI hospitals matched on propensity score were evaluated using a difference-in-differences (DID) method. Secondary analyses evaluated associations by patient MA status and hospital characteristics. Primary outcomes were changes in 90-day total spending on LEJR episodes and 90-day readmissions; secondary outcomes were postacute spending and discharge to postacute care providers.

RESULTS

Average episode spending decreased more at BPCI versus non-BPCI hospitals (change, -2.2% [95% CI, -3.6% to -0.71%]; P = 0.004), but differences in changes in 90-day readmissions were not significant (adjusted DID, -0.47 percentage point [CI, -1.0 to 0.06 percentage point]; P = 0.084). Participation in BPCI was also associated with differences in decreases in postacute spending and discharge to institutional postacute care providers. Decreases in episode spending were larger for hospitals with high baseline spending but did not vary by MA status.

LIMITATION

Nonrandomized studies are subject to residual confounding and selection.

CONCLUSION

Participation in BPCI was associated with modest spillovers in episode savings. Bundled payments may prompt hospitals to implement broad care redesign that produces benefits regardless of insurance coverage.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics at the University of Pennsylvania.

Risk-Adjusted Cost Performance for 90-Day Total Hip Arthroplasty Episodes: Comparing US Hospitals Nationwide Before CJR

BACKGROUND

We characterize variation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) episode payments in the United States. Medicare population immediately preceding implementation of the comprehensive care for joint replacement (CJR) bundled care model and propose a model for ongoing evaluation of hospital performance.

METHODS

We identified THA episodes in Medicare part A 2014-2016 (n = 366,380) and compared 90-day episode payments across years and geographic regions. We fit hierarchical models that regressed episode payments on patient-level fixed and region-level and hospital-level random effects. Random effects estimates were used to characterize risk-adjusted hospital cost performance. We ranked hospitals (n = 3218) in each region by their cost performance estimate and constructed 95% confidence intervals to visualize high-performing and low-performing hospitals.

RESULTS

Mean part A episode payments declined from 2014 to 2016 throughout the United States ($19,925-$17,775; P < .001), primarily attributable to decreased postacute care payments. Ninety-day readmission rates fell by a percentage point (from 7.9% to 6.8%; P < .001). We found significant variation in risk-adjusted episode payments, postacute care utilization, and readmission rates across regions, and ever greater variation at the hospital level.

CONCLUSION

Medicare part A payments decreased for THA episodes between 2014 and 2016. The time frame for this decrease is notable for preceding full implementation of CJR, thus suggesting a more universal embrace of value-based care principles before the start date of CJR. These decreases were primarily because of decreased postacute care utilization and possibly related to falling readmission rates. Yet, significant variation in hospital cost performance remains, even after risk adjustment.

Spillover effects of mandatory hip and knee replacement surgery bundles in medicare

BACKGROUND

Medicare used the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) Model to mandate that hospitals in certain health care markets accept bundled payments for lower extremity joint replacement surgery. CJR has reduced spending with stable quality as intended among Medicare fee-for-service patients, but benefits could "spill over" to individuals insured through private health plans. Definitive evidence of spillovers remains lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between CJR participation and changes in outcomes among privately insured individuals.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

We used 2013-2017 Health Care Cost Institute claims for 418,016 privately insured individuals undergoing joint replacement in 75 CJR and 121 Non-CJR markets. Multivariable generalized linear models with hospital and market random effects and time fixed effects were used to analyze the association between CJR participation and changes in outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Total episode spending, discharge to institutional post-acute care, and quality (e.g., surgical complications, readmissions).

RESULTS

Patients in CJR and Non-CJR markets did not differ in total episode spending (difference of -$157, 95% CI -$1043 to $728, p = 0.73) or discharge to institutional post-acute care (difference of -1.1%, 95% CI -3.2%-1.0%, p = 0.31). Similarly, patients in the two groups did not differ in quality or other utilization outcomes. Findings were generally similar in stratified and sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a lack of evidence of cost or utilization spillovers from CJR to privately insured individuals. There may be limits in the ability of certain value-based payment reforms to drive broad changes in care delivery and patient outcomes.

Spending and quality after three years of Medicare's bundled payments for medical conditions: quasi-experimental difference-in-differences study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether longer term participation in the bundled payments for care initiative (BPCI) for medical conditions in the United States, which held hospitals financially accountable for all spending during an episode of care from hospital admission to 90 days after discharge, was associated with changes in spending, mortality, or health service use.

DESIGN

Quasi-experimental difference-in-differences analysis.

SETTING

US hospitals participating in bundled payments for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or pneumonia, and propensity score matched to non-participating hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

238 hospitals participating in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative (BPCI) and 1415 non-BPCI hospitals. 226 BPCI hospitals were matched to 700 non-BPCI hospitals.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were total spending on episodes and death 90 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes included spending and use by type of post-acute care. BPCI and non-BPCI hospitals were compared by patient, hospital, and hospital market characteristics. Market characteristics included population size, competitiveness, and post-acute bed supply.

RESULTS

In the 226 BPCI hospitals, episodes of care totaled 261 163 in the baseline period and 93 562 in the treatment period compared with 211 208 and 78 643 in the 700 matched non-BPCI hospitals, respectively, with small differences in hospital and market characteristics after matching. Differing trends were seen for some patient characteristics (eg, mean age change -0.3 years at BPCI hospitals v non- BPCI hospitals, P<0.001). In the adjusted analysis, participation in BPCI was associated with a decrease in total episode spending (-1.2%, 95% confidence interval -2.3% to -0.2%). Spending on care at skilled nursing facilities decreased (-6.3%, -10.0% to -2.5%) owing to a reduced number of facility days (-6.2%, -9.8% to -2.6%), and home health spending increased (4.4%, 1.4% to 7.5%). Mortality at 90 days did not change (-0.1 percentage points, 95% confidence interval -0.5 to 0.2 percentage points).

CONCLUSIONS

In this longer term evaluation of a large national programme on medical bundled payments in the US, participation in bundles for four common medical conditions was associated with savings at three years. The savings were generated by practice changes that decreased use of high intensity care after hospital discharge without affecting quality, which also suggests that bundles for medical conditions could require multiple years before changes in savings and practice emerge.

A Model to Improve the Workflow for Radiation Treatments in the Era of Bundled Payments: A Quality Improvement Project Report

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has proposed alternate payment models to improve the efficiency and decrease the redundancy of health care. Bundled payments or episode-based care is one example. Herein, we report on the successful implementation of a quality improvement project in which changing the clinical workflow for postoperative radiation treatment to the hip to prevent heterotopic ossification improved the efficiency of patient care and decreased cost by eliminating redundant imaging through multidisciplinary participation. This project is a model for interdisciplinary collaboration to improve patient care and reduce unnecessary health care spending in the era of bundled payment/episodes of care program implementation.

Risk-Adjusted Cost Performance for 90-Day Total Knee Arthroplasty Episodes: Data and Methods for Comparing U.S. Hospitals Nationwide

BACKGROUND

We propose a model to characterize the variation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) episode payments in the U.S. Medicare population to establish a baseline prior to the full implementation of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model.

METHODS

We identified TKA episodes in Medicare Part A (100% sample) from 2014 to 2016 (n = 717,690) and compared 90-day episode payments across years and geographic regions. We fit hierarchical models that regressed episode payments on patient-level fixed effects (age, sex, race, comorbidities) and region-level (U.S. Census Regions) and hospital-level random effects. Random-effect estimates were used to characterize risk-adjusted hospital cost performance. We ranked hospitals (n = 3,217) in each region by their cost performance estimate and constructed 95% confidence intervals to visualize high and low-performing hospitals.

RESULTS

During this period, the mean Part A episode payments declined throughout the United States ($18,665 to $16,978; p < 0.001), primarily because of decreased post-acute care payments ($6,401 to $4,873; p < 0.0001). The 90-day readmission rates fell by nearly 20% (7.2% to 5.8%; p < 0.001). We found significant variation (p < 0.05) in risk-adjusted episode payments, post-acute care utilization, and readmission rates across regions and even hospitals. The share of hospitals in each geographic region that were low-performance outliers for episode payments ranged from 13% to 31% and those that were high-performance outliers ranged from 16% to 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicare Part A payments for TKA episodes were decreasing prior to the CJR model because of decreases in both post-acute care utilization and hospital readmissions. A significant variation in risk-adjusted hospital cost performance remained. Our results provide a baseline against which to measure the impact of alternative payment models and a methodology by which to measure hospital-level performance, which can be compared with peer hospitals and national benchmarks.

The Effects of Bundled Payment Programs for Hip and Knee Arthroplasty on Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes are essential to demonstrate the value of hip and knee arthroplasty, a common target for payment reforms. We compare patient-reported global and condition-specific outcomes after hip and knee arthroplasty based on hospital participation in Medicare's bundled payment programs.

METHODS

We performed a prospective observational study using the Comparative Effectiveness of Pulmonary Embolism Prevention after Hip and Knee Replacement trial. Differences in patient-reported outcomes through 6 months were compared between bundle and nonbundle hospitals using mixed-effects regression, controlling for baseline patient characteristics. Outcomes were the brief Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score or the brief Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health Score, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, measures of joint function, overall health, and pain, respectively.

RESULTS

Relative to nonbundled hospitals, arthroplasty patients at bundled hospitals had slightly lower improvement in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (-1.8 point relative difference at 6 months; 95% confidence interval -3.2 to -0.4; P = .011) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (-2.3 point relative difference at 6 months; 95% confidence interval -4.0 to -0.5; P = .010). However, these effects were small, and the proportions of patients who achieved a minimum clinically important difference were similar. Preoperative to postoperative change in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health Score and Numeric Pain Rating Scale demonstrated a similar pattern of slightly worse outcomes at bundled hospitals with similar rates of achieving a minimum clinically important difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving care at hospitals participating in Medicare's bundled payment programs do not have meaningfully worse improvements in patient-reported measures of function, health, or pain after hip or knee arthroplasty.

Do Bundled Payment Programs in Joint Replacement Care Hold Promise for Improving Patient Outcomes?

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Innovation Center offers two alternative payment models for joint replacement: the voluntary Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) model and the mandatory Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model. As CMS considers methods for cost reduction, research is needed to understand patient-level outcomes and organizational-level success factors. A retrospective cross-sectional study of hospitals was performed, using regression models to evaluate an aggregate patient satisfaction score, complication rates, and operational differences among BPCI, CJR, and nonparticipating hospitals. Results show that BPCI hospitals received significantly better patient satisfaction scores (88.6) than CJR hospitals (86.0), but complication rates were not significantly different between CJR and BPCI hospitals (2.83 and 2.77, respectively). Factors associated with BPCI participation include academic affiliation, a Northeast region locale, and having a higher CMS efficiency score. Thus, requiring more hospitals to participate in CMS-bundled payment programs as a federal policy may not be the optimal way to improve patient satisfaction and outcomes. Rather, the CJR and BPCI programs should be further studied, and the results generalized for use by nonparticipating hospitals to encourage preparation and participation in CMS value-based initiatives.

Comparison of Payment Margins Between the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Initiative and the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model Shows a Marked Reduction for a Successful Program

BACKGROUND

The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model was implemented to address the 2 most commonly billed inpatient surgical procedures, total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty. The primary purpose of this study was to review the economic implications of 1 institution's mandatory involvement in the CJR in comparison with prior involvement in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative.

METHODS

The mean cost per episode of care was calculated using our institution's historical data. The target prices, projected savings or losses per episode of care, and projected annual savings for both BPCI and CJR were established and were comparatively analyzed.

RESULTS

The CJR target prices will decrease in comparison with BPCI target prices by 24.0% for Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Group (MS-DRG) 469 without fracture, 22.8% for MS-DRG 469 with fracture, 26.1% for MS-DRG 470 without fracture, and 27.7% for MS-DRG 470 with fracture, resulting in a reduction in savings per episode of care by 92.8% for MS-DRG 469 without fracture, 166.0% for MS-DRG 469 with fracture, 94.9% for MS-DRG 470 without fracture, and 61.7% for MS-DRG 470 with fracture. Our institution's projected annual savings under CJR will decrease by 83.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the margin for savings in the CJR will be substantially reduced compared with the margin for savings in the BPCI. In hospitals that had previously devoted resources, these will have far less impact in the CJR, and hospitals new to the CJR that have not made these investments previously will require even greater resources for developing cost reduction and quality control strategies to remain financially solvent.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Association of Bundled Payments for Joint Replacement Surgery and Patient Outcomes With Simultaneous Hospital Participation in Accountable Care Organizations

Importance

An increasing number of hospitals have participated in Medicare's bundled payment and accountable care organization (ACO) programs. Although participation in bundled payments has been associated with savings for lower-extremity joint replacement (LEJR) surgery, simultaneous participation in ACOs may be associated with different outcomes given the prevalence of LEJR among patients receiving care at ACO participant organizations and potential overlap in care redesign strategies adopted under the 2 payment models.

Objective

To examine whether simultaneous participation in a Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) ACO affects the association between hospitals' participation in LEJR episodes under the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative and patient outcomes compared with participation in the BPCI initiative alone.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study, conducted from January 1 to May 31, 2019, used 2011 to 2016 Medicare claims data and incorporated an instrumental variable with a difference-in-differences method among 483 008 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries undergoing LEJR surgery at 212 bundled payment participant hospitals, 105 coparticipant hospitals, and 1413 nonparticipant hospitals in the United States.

Exposures

Hospital participation in both the BPCI initiative and the MSSP (coparticipants), BPCI only (bundled payment participants), or neither (nonparticipants).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Changes in clinical outcomes and mean LEJR episode spending.

Results

A total of 483 008 patients (mean [SD] age, 73.0 [8.4] years; 308 173 [63.8%] female) were included in the study. No differential changes were found in patient and hospital characteristics across participation groups. In adjusted analysis, coparticipants had 1.5% (95% CI, 0.7%-2.2%; P < .001) more unplanned readmissions than did bundled payment participants. Compared with bundled payment participants, coparticipants also had differentially greater decreases in hospital length of stay (adjusted difference-in-differences value, -5.3%; 95% CI, -7.1% to -3.5%; P < .001) and home health care use (adjusted difference-in-differences value, -3.4%; 95% CI, -4.5% to -2.3%; P < .001) and greater increases in postdischarge outpatient follow-up (adjusted difference-in-differences value, 2.1%; 95% CI, 0.9%-3.3%; P < .001). Coparticipants and bundled payment participants did not have differential changes in episode spending (adjusted difference-in-differences value, 0.4%; 95% CI, -0.7% to 1.6%; P = .46), although both groups had more decreased spending compared with nonparticipants.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among bundled payment participants, coparticipation in ACOs was not associated with LEJR episode savings but was associated with differential changes in postacute care use patterns and unplanned readmissions. These findings support the longer-term benefits of LEJR bundles and suggest that coparticipants may adopt care redesign strategies that differ from hospitals with bundled payments only.

Changes in hospital safety following penalties in the US Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program: retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between hospital penalization in the US Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) and subsequent changes in clinical outcomes.

DESIGN

Regression discontinuity design applied to a retrospective cohort from inpatient Medicare claims.

SETTING

3238 acute care hospitals in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries discharged from acute care hospitals between 23 July 2014 and 30 November 2016 and eligible for at least one targeted hospital acquired condition (n=15 470 334).

INTERVENTION

Hospital receipt of a penalty in the first year of the HACRP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Episode level count of targeted hospital acquired conditions per 1000 episodes, 30 day readmissions, and 30 day mortality.

RESULTS

Of 724 hospitals penalized under the HACRP in fiscal year 2015, 708 were represented in the study. Mean counts of hospital acquired conditions were 2.72 per 1000 episodes for penalized hospitals and 2.06 per 1000 episodes for non-penalized hospitals; 30 day readmissions were 14.4% and 14.0%, respectively, and 30 day mortality was 9.0% for both hospital groups. Penalized hospitals were more likely to be large, teaching institutions, and have a greater share of patients with low socioeconomic status than non-penalized hospitals. HACRP penalties were associated with a non-significant change of -0.16 hospital acquired conditions per 1000 episodes (95% confidence interval -0.53 to 0.20), -0.36 percentage points in 30 day readmission (-1.06 to 0.33), and -0.04 percentage points in 30 day mortality (-0.59 to 0.52). No clear patterns of clinical improvement were observed across hospital characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Penalization was not associated with significant changes in rates of hospital acquired conditions, 30 day readmission, or 30 day mortality, and does not appear to drive meaningful clinical improvements. By disproportionately penalizing hospitals caring for more disadvantaged patients, the HACRP could exacerbate inequities in care.

Evaluation of Economic and Clinical Outcomes Under Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Mandatory Bundled Payments for Joint Replacements

IMPORTANCE

In 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) launched its first mandatory bundled payment program, the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model, by randomizing metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) into the payment model.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate changes in key economic and clinical outcomes associated with the CJR model.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective, national, population-based analysis of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries undergoing lower extremity joint replacement was conducted using 100% Medicare Part A data and 5% Medicare Part B data. Within an intention-to-treat framework, a difference-in-differences approach was used to compare Medicare spending, quality of care, volume of episodes, and patient selection in episodes of lower extremity joint replacements in the first 2 years of the program between propensity score-matched CJR and non-CJR hospitals (episodes initiated from April 1, 2016, through December 31, 2017, with the latter completed by March 31, 2018). Lower extremity joint replacement episodes in MSAs randomly assigned to the CJR model were compared with those in MSAs not assigned to the CJR model.

EXPOSURES

Random assignment of MSAs into the CJR model within prespecified strata.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Spending and its components, quality of care, volume of episodes, and patient characteristics were the main outcomes.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there were 157 828 primary lower extremity joint replacement cases across 684 hospitals in the CJR (treatment) group (101 641 [64.4%] women; mean [SD] age, 72.8 [8.9] years) and 180 594 cases across 726 hospitals in the non-CJR (control) group (115 580 women [64.0%] women; mean [SD] age, 72.6 [8.8] years). The CJR was associated with a decrease of $582 per episode in Medicare Part A spending, a 2.5% savings on claims (95% CI, -$873 to -$290; P < .001) driven by a 5.5% decline in 90-day postacute care spending, concentrated in skilled nursing facilities (-4.5% change from baseline; 95% CI, -$460 to -$26; P = .03) and inpatient rehabilitation facilities (-22.9% change from baseline; 95% CI,-$497 to -$176; P < .001). Estimated savings on claims, while consistent with changes in practice patterns, may not have exceeded the reconciliation payments to hospitals reported by CMS to date. No significant changes in hospital length of stay, readmissions, complications, 30- or 90-day mortality, volume of episodes, or patient characteristics relative to control were found.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The CJR was associated with reduced Medicare Part A spending on claims over 2 years, largely through lower postacute spending. Mandatory bundled payments may serve as a useful model for policy efforts to change clinicians' and facilities' behavior without harming quality.

Medicare's bundled payment model did not change skilled nursing facility discharge patterns

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether participation in Medicare's voluntary Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) model was associated with changes in discharge referral patterns to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), specifically number of SNF partners and discharge concentration.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective observational study using difference-in-differences analysis.

METHODS

We used Medicare claims data from 2010 to 2015 to identify admissions for lower joint replacement surgery and the following medical conditions: congestive heart failure, renal failure, sepsis, pneumonia, urinary tract and kidney infections, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stroke. We used difference-in-differences analyses to assess changes in discharge patterns among BPCI-participating hospitals compared with matched control hospitals.

RESULTS

Our analytic sample included 3078 acute care hospitals and 14,866 Medicare-certified SNFs in the United States, encompassing more than 47 million hospital discharges. Of these hospitals, 416 participated in BPCI, with the majority selecting into joint replacement episodes (n = 295). BPCI participation was not associated with any change in number of SNF partners (increase by 0.8 SNFs among BPCI hospitals relative to non-BPCI hospitals; 95% CI, -0.2 to 1.9; P = .11) or in discharge concentration (increase in Herfindahl-Hirschman Index of 0.2 among BPCI hospitals relative to non-BPCI hospitals; 95% CI, -68.7 to 69.1; P = .36). Results did not vary across clinical conditions and were robust across duration of BPCI participation and with different comparison groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital participation in BPCI was not associated with changes in the number of SNF partners or in discharge concentration relative to non-BPCI hospitals. More research is needed to understand how hospitals are responding to bundled payment incentives and specific practices that contribute to improvements in cost and quality.