1 / 20

Study Purpose and Primary Analyses

urbano
Télécharger la présentation

Study Purpose and Primary Analyses

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Effects of Organizational Relationships on PAC Site of Care ChoicesBarbara Gage, PhD, Melissa Morley, PhD, Roberta Constantine, PhD, Pamela Spain, PhD, Melvin Ingber, PhD, Justine Allpress, BS, RTI InternationalFunded by ASPESusan Bogasky, Project OfficerAcademy Health Annual Research MeetingJune, 2008

  2. Study Purpose and Primary Analyses • Examine the effects of organizational links between acute and post-acute care on the likelihood of post-acute care use, the types of services used, and the number and types of transitions. • Geographic analysis of provider availability • Episode analysis using 2005 Medicare claims • Transfer pattern analysis • Utilization, length of stay, and Medicare payments • Organizational linkages • Regression models

  3. Data Sources • Medicare claims (CY 2005) • Primary source used to build episodes • Utilization, payments, patterns of PAC use • Online Survey and Certification Reporting System (CY 2006) • Facility characteristics • Geographic analyses • Hospital cost report data (FY 2004-2005) • Identify hospital-based sub-providers

  4. Methods Defining Organizational Relationships • 3 types of mutually-exclusive organizational relationships—Acute Discharge to: • Hospital-based sub-providers: identified as owned by the HCRIS reports • Co-located providers: identified by geographic latitude and longitude coordinates of free-standing providers within 250 yards of each other using GIS • Free-standing providers: those not in the other 2 groups

  5. MethodsCreating Episodes of Care • Beneficiary-level episodes of care including all services after the index hospitalization until a 60 day gap in services occurs • Episodes include acute hospital stay, long term care hospital, inpatient rehabilitation facility, skilled nursing facility, home health, and hospital outpatient therapy • Episodes include hospital readmissions • Only live hospital discharges are included in the prediction models

  6. Distribution of Freestanding versus Hospital Based SNFs, IRFs, and HwH LTCHs, 2006 SOURCE: RTI Analysis of 2006 POS data.

  7. Co-located Providers, 2006 SOURCE: RTI Analysis of 2006 POS data.

  8. Acute Index Admission LOS and Payment, by Discharge Destination, 2005 SOURCE: RTI Analysis of 2005 Medicare Claims (mmor075b).

  9. Proportion of Discharges to First PAC Settingby Organizational Relationship, 2005 SOURCE: RTI analysis of 2005 Medicare Claims (mmor120).

  10. Demographics and Severity by Discharge Destination, 2005 SOURCE: RTI Analysis of 2005 Medicare Claims (mmor075b).

  11. First Site of Post-Acute Care, by Acute Index Admission DRG, 2005 SOURCE: RTI Analysis of 2005 Medicare Claims (mmor075b).

  12. Utilization and Payment • * This is a row percent. • Note that utilization is measured in days for acute, IRF, LTCH, and SNF; visits for HHA, and units of service for hospital outpatient therapy. • APR-DRG level 1 = Minor Severity; APR-DRG level 2 = Moderate Severity; APR-DRG level 3 = Major Severity; APR-DRG level 4 = Extreme Severity.

  13. Patterns of Post-Acute Care Use, 2005 NOTES: 1. A=Acute Hospital; H=HHA; I=IRF; L=LTCH; O=Outpatient Therapy; S=SNF 2. 75 percent of PAC episodes are shown here. SOURCE: RTI analysis of 2005 Medicare claims (mmor167).

  14. Regression Results: Predicting Index LOS, PAC Use, and Acute Readmission

  15. Regression Results: Predicting First Site of PAC

  16. Results Overview: Organizational Relationships • Organizational relationships affect choice of PAC setting • The presence of a co-located PAC provider (located within 250 yards for the purposes of this analysis) or a PAC subprovider affects discharge patterns to IRF, SNF, LTCH • Organizational relationships are not strong predictors of HHA use • The odds of PAC use are higher for benes discharged from hospitals with co-located PAC providers or PAC subproviders

  17. Results Overview: Supply of PAC • Supply of PAC providers does affect use of services • Odds of discharges to IRF and LTCH are significantly higher in areas with more beds/1000 beneficiaries

  18. Results Overview:Severity of Illness • Severity of Illness as measured using APR-DRGs is highly predictive of • Index admission LOS • Use of any PAC • First site of PAC • Probability of acute hospital readmission during PAC episode

  19. Discussion of Findings • Results suggest that site of care choices appear to differ by severity of illness, but • Choices are influenced by organizational relationships • Substitution is possible, but the presence of a subprovider or co-located provider may influence the relative use of a particular type of PAC provider

  20. Limitations • Co-location effects are underestimated • Certification data limited on satellite providers • System membership is not reliably identified • Location of co-owned, freestanding providers is not identified-estimated using GIS • PECOS data was not complete for this analysis • Final Report available at: http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/08/examine/report.html

More Related