Evaluating Inpatient Hospital Charges Associated With Trauma Service Patients Participating in an Accountable Care Organization.

IF 2.5 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Services Insights Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/11786329231166367
Richard J Salhany, Daniel Genovese-Scullin, Jasmin A Eversley-Danso, Humroy Mendez, Vladimir Rubinshteyn, Nisha Lakhi
{"title":"Evaluating Inpatient Hospital Charges Associated With Trauma Service Patients Participating in an Accountable Care Organization.","authors":"Richard J Salhany,&nbsp;Daniel Genovese-Scullin,&nbsp;Jasmin A Eversley-Danso,&nbsp;Humroy Mendez,&nbsp;Vladimir Rubinshteyn,&nbsp;Nisha Lakhi","doi":"10.1177/11786329231166367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Medicare Accountable Care Organization (ACO) Program has created a vehicle for providers who practice cost containment and exceed quality for the Medicare population. The success of ACO's nationwide have been well documented. However, there is little research evaluating if there is a cost saving benefit in trauma care with respect to participating in an ACO. Thus, the primary objective of this study was to evaluate inpatient hospital charges associated with trauma service utilization of patients participating in the ACO compared to non-ACO patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This case-control retrospective study includes a comparison of inpatients charges of ACO patients (cases) and general trauma patients (controls) presenting to our trauma center in Staten Island, New York from January 1st, 2019 to December 31st, 2021. A 1:1 matching of case to control was performed based on age, sex, race, and injury severity score. Statistical analysis was performed with IBM SPSS, with <i>P</i> < .05 as significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 80 patients were included in the ACO cohort and 80 matched in the General Trauma cohort. Patient demographics were similar. Comorbidities were similar with the exception of a higher in incidence of hypertension (75.0% vs 47.5%, <i>P</i> < .001) and cardiac disease (35.0% vs 17.5%, <i>P</i> = .012) in the ACO cohort. Both the ACO and general trauma cohort had similar Injury Severity Scores, number of visits and lenght of stay. Both charge total ($76 148.93 vs $70 916.82, <i>P</i> = .630) receipt total ($15 080.26 vs $14 180, <i>P</i> = .662) charges were similar between ACO and General Trauma patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In spite of increased incidence of hypertension and cardiac disease in ACO trauma patients, mean Injury Severity Score, number of visits, length of hospital stay, ICU admission rate and charge total was similar compared to general trauma patients presenting to our Level 1 Adult Trauma Center.</p>","PeriodicalId":12876,"journal":{"name":"Health Services Insights","volume":"16 ","pages":"11786329231166367"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ca/ea/10.1177_11786329231166367.PMC10090541.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services Insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11786329231166367","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Medicare Accountable Care Organization (ACO) Program has created a vehicle for providers who practice cost containment and exceed quality for the Medicare population. The success of ACO's nationwide have been well documented. However, there is little research evaluating if there is a cost saving benefit in trauma care with respect to participating in an ACO. Thus, the primary objective of this study was to evaluate inpatient hospital charges associated with trauma service utilization of patients participating in the ACO compared to non-ACO patients.

Methods: This case-control retrospective study includes a comparison of inpatients charges of ACO patients (cases) and general trauma patients (controls) presenting to our trauma center in Staten Island, New York from January 1st, 2019 to December 31st, 2021. A 1:1 matching of case to control was performed based on age, sex, race, and injury severity score. Statistical analysis was performed with IBM SPSS, with P < .05 as significant.

Results: A total of 80 patients were included in the ACO cohort and 80 matched in the General Trauma cohort. Patient demographics were similar. Comorbidities were similar with the exception of a higher in incidence of hypertension (75.0% vs 47.5%, P < .001) and cardiac disease (35.0% vs 17.5%, P = .012) in the ACO cohort. Both the ACO and general trauma cohort had similar Injury Severity Scores, number of visits and lenght of stay. Both charge total ($76 148.93 vs $70 916.82, P = .630) receipt total ($15 080.26 vs $14 180, P = .662) charges were similar between ACO and General Trauma patients.

Conclusion: In spite of increased incidence of hypertension and cardiac disease in ACO trauma patients, mean Injury Severity Score, number of visits, length of hospital stay, ICU admission rate and charge total was similar compared to general trauma patients presenting to our Level 1 Adult Trauma Center.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估住院病人的费用与创伤服务患者参与一个负责任的护理组织。
背景:医疗保险责任医疗组织(ACO)计划已经创建了一个工具的提供者谁实行成本控制和医疗保险人口超过质量。全国范围内ACO的成功已经有了充分的记录。然而,很少有研究评估是否有创伤护理方面的成本节约效益与参与ACO。因此,本研究的主要目的是评估参加ACO的患者与非ACO患者的住院费用与创伤服务利用的关系。方法:本病例-对照-回顾性研究包括比较2019年1月1日至2021年12月31日在纽约史坦顿岛创伤中心就诊的ACO患者(病例)和普通创伤患者(对照组)的住院费用。根据年龄、性别、种族和损伤严重程度评分,将病例与对照组进行1:1匹配。结果:共有80例患者被纳入ACO队列,80例患者被纳入普通创伤队列。患者人口统计数据相似。ACO组的合并症相似,但高血压发病率较高(75.0% vs 47.5%, P = 0.012)。ACO组和普通创伤组的损伤严重程度评分、就诊次数和住院时间相似。ACO和General Trauma患者的总收费(76 148.93美元vs 70 916.82美元,P = 0.630)和总收费(15 080.26美元vs 14 180美元,P = 0.662)相似。结论:尽管ACO创伤患者高血压和心脏疾病的发生率增加,但与到我们一级成人创伤中心就诊的普通创伤患者相比,平均损伤严重程度评分、就诊次数、住院时间、ICU住院率和总收费相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Services Insights
Health Services Insights HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Examining the Cost-Effectiveness of Introducing Patient Navigation Services for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among a Low-Income and Uninsured Population. Is Childcare Availability in Addiction Treatment Associated with County-Level Childcare Prices and Median Income in the United States? A Qualitative Assessment of Low Vision Care Among Optometric Practitioners in Sub-Saharan Africa Using a Health Systems Framework. Opportunities and Challenges of an Integrative Care Structure for Oncological Patients: A Qualitative Analysis of Provider Perspectives. Implementers Perspectives on the Routine Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Services: A Qualitative Study Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1