Coding Intensity Through Health Risk Assessments and Chart Reviews in Medicare Advantage: Does It Explain Resource Use?

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Medical Care Research and Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-04 DOI:10.1177/10775587231191169
Jeah Jung, Roger Feldman, Caroline Carlin
{"title":"Coding Intensity Through Health Risk Assessments and Chart Reviews in Medicare Advantage: Does It Explain Resource Use?","authors":"Jeah Jung, Roger Feldman, Caroline Carlin","doi":"10.1177/10775587231191169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Medicare Advantage (MA) plans increase their risk-adjusted payments through intensive coding in health risk assessments (HRAs) and chart reviews. Whether the additional diagnoses from HRAs and chart reviews are associated with increased resource use is not known. Using national MA encounter data (2016-2019), we examine the relative contributions of three health risk scores to MA resource use: the <i>base</i> risk score that excludes diagnoses from HRAs and chart reviews; the <i>incremental</i> score added to the base score from diagnoses in HRAs; and the <i>incremental</i> score added from diagnoses in chart reviews. We find that the incremental risk scores explain 53.5% to 64.5% of resource use relative to the base risk score effect-that is, 35.5% to 46.5% of the incremental risk scores are not accompanied by increased resource use. While HRAs and chart reviews contribute to more complete coding of diagnoses, they are sources of intensive coding not accompanied by resource use.</p>","PeriodicalId":51127,"journal":{"name":"Medical Care Research and Review","volume":" ","pages":"641-647"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Care Research and Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10775587231191169","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Medicare Advantage (MA) plans increase their risk-adjusted payments through intensive coding in health risk assessments (HRAs) and chart reviews. Whether the additional diagnoses from HRAs and chart reviews are associated with increased resource use is not known. Using national MA encounter data (2016-2019), we examine the relative contributions of three health risk scores to MA resource use: the base risk score that excludes diagnoses from HRAs and chart reviews; the incremental score added to the base score from diagnoses in HRAs; and the incremental score added from diagnoses in chart reviews. We find that the incremental risk scores explain 53.5% to 64.5% of resource use relative to the base risk score effect-that is, 35.5% to 46.5% of the incremental risk scores are not accompanied by increased resource use. While HRAs and chart reviews contribute to more complete coding of diagnoses, they are sources of intensive coding not accompanied by resource use.

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
通过健康风险评估的编码强度和医疗保险优势的图表回顾:它能解释资源使用吗?
Medicare Advantage(MA)计划通过健康风险评估(HRA)和图表审查中的密集编码来增加其风险调整后的支付。HRA和图表审查的额外诊断是否与资源使用的增加有关尚不清楚。使用全国MA遭遇数据(2016-2019),我们检验了三个健康风险评分对MA资源使用的相对贡献:将诊断排除在HRA和图表审查之外的基本风险评分;将HRA中诊断的增量分数添加到基本分数;以及从图表评审中的诊断中添加的增量分数。我们发现,相对于基本风险评分效应,增量风险评分解释了53.5%至64.5%的资源使用,即35.5%至46.5%的增量风险评分没有伴随着资源使用的增加。虽然HRA和图表审查有助于更完整的诊断编码,但它们是密集编码的来源,不伴随资源使用。
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
Medical Care Research and Review
Medical Care Research and Review 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
4.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Care Research and Review (MCRR) is a peer-reviewed bi-monthly journal containing critical reviews of literature on organizational structure, economics, and the financing of health and medical care systems. MCRR also includes original empirical and theoretical research and trends to enable policy makers to make informed decisions, as well as to identify health care trends. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 25 days
期刊最新文献
Impact of Fentanyl Test Strips as Harm Reduction for Drug-Related Mortality. Patient Decisional Preferences: A Systematic Review of Instruments Used to Determine Patients' Preferred Role in Decision-Making. Cost, Quality, and Utilization After Hospital-Physician and Hospital-Post Acute Care Vertical Integration: A Systematic Review. A Framework for the Design of Risk-Adjustment Models in Health care Provider Payment Systems. Trends in Medicaid Take-Up Among Eligible Adults After the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansions: 2014-2019.
×
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:481959085
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