医疗保险过渡性护理管理服务与再入院和死亡率的关系。

Health affairs scholar Pub Date : 2024-10-28 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1093/haschl/qxae135
Rachel O Reid, Neeraj Sood, Ruolin Lu, Cheryl L Damberg
{"title":"医疗保险过渡性护理管理服务与再入院和死亡率的关系。","authors":"Rachel O Reid, Neeraj Sood, Ruolin Lu, Cheryl L Damberg","doi":"10.1093/haschl/qxae135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2013, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced codes to reimburse outpatient providers for post-discharge transitional care management (TCM). Understanding the implications of TCM reimbursement on outcomes is crucial for evaluating CMS's investment and guiding future policy. We analyzed the association between physician organization (PO) TCM code use and post-discharge readmissions and mortality using 100% fee-for-service Medicare claims. Using a difference-in-differences approach we compared 1131 \"high-TCM\" POs (top quartile of TCM code use from 2015-2017) to 1133 \"low-TCM\" POs (bottom quartile) from before (2012) and after (2015-2017) TCM code implementation, controlling for PO and beneficiary attributes and readmission risk. TCM code use was associated with decreased 30- and 90-day readmissions (-0.31 [95%CI: -0.52, -0.09] and -0.42 [95% CI: -0.71, -0.14] percentage points, respectively), but no significant difference in mortality. Year-by-year, 2017 saw greatest readmission reduction, with a slight mortality reduction in that year only. Readmission reductions were greatest in POs not affiliated with health systems, Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), or academic medical centers, and least in those with fewer primary care physicians. Narrow, indirect interventions like fee-for-service TCM billing code reimbursement may have limited potential to improve post-discharge outcomes overall. However, small independent practices may derive somewhat greater benefit from this support for post-discharge care.</p>","PeriodicalId":94025,"journal":{"name":"Health affairs scholar","volume":"2 11","pages":"qxae135"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11578547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medicare transitional care management services' association with readmissions and mortality.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel O Reid, Neeraj Sood, Ruolin Lu, Cheryl L Damberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/haschl/qxae135\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In 2013, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced codes to reimburse outpatient providers for post-discharge transitional care management (TCM). Understanding the implications of TCM reimbursement on outcomes is crucial for evaluating CMS's investment and guiding future policy. We analyzed the association between physician organization (PO) TCM code use and post-discharge readmissions and mortality using 100% fee-for-service Medicare claims. Using a difference-in-differences approach we compared 1131 \\\"high-TCM\\\" POs (top quartile of TCM code use from 2015-2017) to 1133 \\\"low-TCM\\\" POs (bottom quartile) from before (2012) and after (2015-2017) TCM code implementation, controlling for PO and beneficiary attributes and readmission risk. TCM code use was associated with decreased 30- and 90-day readmissions (-0.31 [95%CI: -0.52, -0.09] and -0.42 [95% CI: -0.71, -0.14] percentage points, respectively), but no significant difference in mortality. Year-by-year, 2017 saw greatest readmission reduction, with a slight mortality reduction in that year only. Readmission reductions were greatest in POs not affiliated with health systems, Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), or academic medical centers, and least in those with fewer primary care physicians. Narrow, indirect interventions like fee-for-service TCM billing code reimbursement may have limited potential to improve post-discharge outcomes overall. However, small independent practices may derive somewhat greater benefit from this support for post-discharge care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94025,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health affairs scholar\",\"volume\":\"2 11\",\"pages\":\"qxae135\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11578547/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health affairs scholar\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxae135\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health affairs scholar","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxae135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2013 年,美国医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)推出了门诊医疗服务提供者出院后过渡性护理管理(TCM)的补偿标准。了解过渡期护理管理报销对疗效的影响对于评估 CMS 的投资和指导未来政策至关重要。我们使用 100%联邦医疗保险付费服务索赔分析了医生组织(PO)中医治疗代码使用与出院后再入院和死亡率之间的关联。我们使用差分法比较了 1131 家 "高中医 "医疗机构(2015-2017 年中医代码使用率最高的四分位数)和 1133 家 "低中医 "医疗机构(最低的四分位数),分别来自中医代码实施前(2012 年)和实施后(2015-2017 年),并控制了医疗机构和受益人属性以及再入院风险。中医治疗代码的使用与 30 天和 90 天再入院率的降低相关(分别为-0.31 [95%CI: -0.52, -0.09]和-0.42 [95%CI: -0.71, -0.14]个百分点),但死亡率没有显著差异。逐年来看,2017 年的再入院率降低幅度最大,仅死亡率略有降低。不隶属于医疗系统、责任医疗组织(ACO)或学术医疗中心的医疗机构的再入院率降低幅度最大,而拥有较少初级保健医生的医疗机构的再入院率降低幅度最小。像中医收费服务计费代码报销这样狭隘、间接的干预措施在改善出院后总体疗效方面的潜力可能有限。然而,小型独立诊所可能会从这种出院后护理支持中获得更大的收益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Medicare transitional care management services' association with readmissions and mortality.

In 2013, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced codes to reimburse outpatient providers for post-discharge transitional care management (TCM). Understanding the implications of TCM reimbursement on outcomes is crucial for evaluating CMS's investment and guiding future policy. We analyzed the association between physician organization (PO) TCM code use and post-discharge readmissions and mortality using 100% fee-for-service Medicare claims. Using a difference-in-differences approach we compared 1131 "high-TCM" POs (top quartile of TCM code use from 2015-2017) to 1133 "low-TCM" POs (bottom quartile) from before (2012) and after (2015-2017) TCM code implementation, controlling for PO and beneficiary attributes and readmission risk. TCM code use was associated with decreased 30- and 90-day readmissions (-0.31 [95%CI: -0.52, -0.09] and -0.42 [95% CI: -0.71, -0.14] percentage points, respectively), but no significant difference in mortality. Year-by-year, 2017 saw greatest readmission reduction, with a slight mortality reduction in that year only. Readmission reductions were greatest in POs not affiliated with health systems, Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), or academic medical centers, and least in those with fewer primary care physicians. Narrow, indirect interventions like fee-for-service TCM billing code reimbursement may have limited potential to improve post-discharge outcomes overall. However, small independent practices may derive somewhat greater benefit from this support for post-discharge care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Correction to: No Surprises Act independent dispute resolution outcomes for emergency services. All-cause nursing home mortality rates have remained above pre-pandemic levels after accounting for decline in occupancy. Charting new territory: the early lessons in integrating social determinant of health (SDOH) measures into practice. Measuring hospital inpatient Procedure Access Inequality in the United States. Examining the use of telehealth to initiate buprenorphine for opioid use disorder treatment.
×
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