Association of US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital 30-Day Risk-Standardized Readmission Metric With Care Quality and Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction: Findings From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry/Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines

A Detailed Analysis of Cardiac Rehabilitation on 180-Day All-Cause Hospital Readmission and Mortality

PURPOSE

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is endorsed for coronary artery disease (CAD), but studies report inconsistent findings regarding efficacy. The objective of this study was to determine whether confounding factors, potentially contributing to these heterogeneous findings, impact the effect of CR on all-cause readmission and mortality.

METHODS

Patients (n = 2641) with CAD, CR eligible, and physically able were identified. Electronic medical records were inspected individually for each patient to extract demographic, clinical characteristic, readmission, and mortality information. Patients (n = 214) attended ≥1 CR session (CR group). Survival was considered free from: all-cause readmission; or composite outcome of all-cause readmission or death. Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and discharge criteria, were used to determine HR with 95% CI and to compare 180-d survival rates between the CR and no-CR groups.

RESULTS

During 180 d of follow-up, 12.1% and 18.7% of the CR and non-CR patients were readmitted to the hospital. There was one death (0.5%) in the CR group, while 98 deaths (4.0%) occurred in the non-CR group. After adjustment for age, sex, race, depression, anxiety, dyslipidemia, hypertension, obesity, smoking, type 2 diabetes, and discharge criteria, the final model revealed a significant 42.7% reduction in readmission or mortality risk for patients who attended CR (HR = 0.57: 95% CI, 0.33-0.98; P = .043).

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and cardiovascular discharge criteria, the risk of 180-d all-cause readmission or death was markedly decreased in patients who attended CR compared with those who did not.

Risk-standardized mortality metric to monitor hospital performance for chest pain presentations

AIMS

Risk-standardized mortality rates (RSMR) have been used to monitor hospital performance in procedural and disease-based registries, but limitations include the potential to promote risk-averse clinician decisions and a lack of assessment of the whole patient journey. We aimed to determine whether it is feasible to use RSMR at the symptom-level to monitor hospital performance using routinely collected, linked, clinical and administrative data of chest pain presentations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We included 192 978 consecutive adult patients (mean age 62 years; 51% female) with acute chest pain without ST-elevation brought via emergency medical services (EMS) to 53 emergency departments in Victoria, Australia (1/1/2015-30/6/2019). From 32 candidate variables, a risk-adjusted logistic regression model for 30-day mortality (C-statistic 0.899) was developed, with excellent calibration in the full cohort and with optimism-adjusted bootstrap internal validation. Annual 30-day RSMR was calculated by dividing each hospital's observed mortality by the expected mortality rate and multiplying it by the annual mean 30-day mortality rate. Hospital performance according to annual 30-day RSMR was lower for outer regional or remote locations and at hospitals without revascularisation capabilities. Hospital rates of angiography or transfer for patients diagnosed with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) correlated with annual 30-day RSMR, but no correlations were observed with other existing key performance indicators.

CONCLUSION

Annual hospital 30-day RSMR can be feasibly calculated at the symptom-level using routinely collected, linked clinical, and administrative data. This outcome-based metric appears to provide additional information for monitoring hospital performance in comparison with existing process of care key performance measures.

Achieving Equity in Hospital Performance Assessments Using Composite Race-Specific Measures of Risk-Standardized Readmission and Mortality Rates for Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

The contemporary measures of hospital performance for heart failure hospitalization and 30-day risk-standardized readmission rate (RSRR) and risk-standardized mortality rate (RSMR) are estimated using the same risk adjustment model and overall event rate for all patients. Thus, these measures are mainly driven by the care quality and outcomes for the majority racial and ethnic group, and may not adequately represent the hospital performance for patients of Black and other races.

METHODS

Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries from January 2014 to December 2019 hospitalized with heart failure were identified. Hospital-level 30-day RSRR and RSMR were estimated using the traditional race-agnostic models and the race-specific approach. The composite race-specific performance metric was calculated as the average of the RSRR/RMSR measures derived separately for each race and ethnicity group. Correlation and concordance in hospital performance for all patients and patients of Black and other races were assessed using the composite race-specific and race-agnostic metrics.

RESULTS

The study included 1 903 232 patients (75.7% White [n=1 439 958]; 14.5% Black [n=276 684]; and 9.8% other races [n=186 590]) with heart failure from 1860 hospitals. There was a modest correlation between hospital-level 30-day performance metrics for patients of White versus Black race (Pearson correlation coefficient: RSRR=0.42; RSMR=0.26). Compared with the race-agnostic RSRR and RSMR, composite race-specific metrics for all patients demonstrated stronger correlation with RSRR (correlation coefficient: 0.60 versus 0.74) and RSMR (correlation coefficient: 0.44 versus 0.51) for Black patients. Concordance in hospital performance for all patients and patients of Black race was also higher with race-specific (versus race-agnostic) metrics (RSRR=64% versus 53% concordantly high-performing; 61% versus 51% concordantly low-performing). Race-specific RSRR and RSMR metrics (versus race-agnostic) led to reclassification in performance ranking of 35.8% and 39.2% of hospitals, respectively, with better 30-day and 1-year outcomes for patients of all race groups at hospitals reclassified as high-performing.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients hospitalized with heart failure, race-specific 30-day RSMR and RSRR are more equitable in representing hospital performance for patients of Black and other races.

Value in acute care surgery, part 2: Defining and measuring quality outcomes

ABSTRACT

The prior article in this series delved into measuring cost in acute care surgery, and this subsequent work explains in detail how quality is measured. Specifically, objective quality is based on outcome measures, both from administrative and clinical registry databases from a multitude of sources. Risk stratification is key in comparing similar populations across diseases and procedures. Importantly, a move toward focusing on subjective outcomes like patient-reported outcomes measures and financial well-being are vital to evolving surgical quality measures for the 21st century.

Ability of the LACE Index to Predict 30-Day Readmissions in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction

Aims: This study aimed to utilize the existing LACE index (length of stay, acuity of admission, comorbidity index and emergency room visit in the past six months) to predict the risk of 30-day readmission and to find the associated factors in patients with AMI. Methods: This was a retrospective study and LACE index scores were calculated for patients admitted with AMI between 2015 and 2019. Data were utilized from the hospital’s electronic medical record. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to find the association between covariates and 30-day readmission. The risk prediction ability of the LACE index for 30-day readmission was analyzed by receiver operating characteristic curves with the C statistic. Results: A total of 205 (5.7%) patients were readmitted within 30 days. The odds ratio of older age group (OR = 1.78, 95% CI: 1.54–2.05), admission via emergency ward (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.42–1.54) and LACE score ≥10 (OR = 2.71; 95% CI: 1.03–4.37) were highly associated with 30-day readmissions and statistically significant. The receiver operating characteristic curve C statistic of the LACE index for AMI patients was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75–0.80) and showed favorable discrimination in the prediction of 30-day readmission. Conclusion: The LACE index showed a good discrimination to predict the risk of 30-day readmission for hospitalized patients with AMI. Further study would be recommended to focus on additional factors that can be used to predict the risk of 30-day readmission; this should be considered to improve the model performance of the LACE index for other acute conditions by using the national-based administrative data.

Readmission After ACS: Burden, Epidemiology, and Mitigation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The past decade has brought increased efforts to better understand causes for ACS readmissions and strategies to minimize them. This review seeks to provide a critical appraisal of this rapidly growing body of literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

Prior to 2010, readmission rates for patients suffering from ACS remained relatively constant. More recently, several strategies have been implemented to mitigate this including improved risk assessment models, transition care bundles, and development of targeted programs by federal organizations and professional societies. These strategies have been associated with a significant reduction in ACS readmission rates in more recent years. With this, improvements in 30-day post-discharge mortality rates are also being appreciated. As we continue to expand our knowledge on independent risk factors for ACS readmissions, further strategies targeting at-risk populations may further decrease the rate of readmissions. Efforts to understand and reduce 30-day ACS readmission rates have resulted in overall improved quality of care for patients.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2022 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2022 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population and an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, adverse pregnancy outcomes, vascular contributions to brain health, and the global burden of cardiovascular disease and healthy life expectancy.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Assessing the influence of patient language preference on 30 day hospital readmission risk from home health care: A retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

In home health care, language barriers are understudied. Language barriers between patients and providers are known to affect a variety of patient outcomes. How a patient's language preference influences hospital readmission risk from home health care has yet to be determined.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if home care patients' language preference is associated with their risk for hospital readmission from home health care within 30 days of hospital discharge.

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study of hospital readmissions from an urban home health care agency's administrative records and the national electronic home health care record for the United States, captured between 2010 and 2015.

SETTING

New York City, New York, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

The dataset comprised 90,221 post-hospitalization patients and 6.5 million home health care visits.

METHODS

First, a Chi-square test was used to determine if there were significant differences in crude readmission rates based on language group. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for significant differences in known hospital readmission risk factors between to examine all-cause hospital readmission during a home health care stay. The final matched sample included 87,561 patients with a language preference of English, Spanish, Russian, Chinese, or Korean. English-speaking patients were considered the comparison group to the non-English speaking patients. A Marginal Structural Model was applied to estimate the impact of non-English language preference against English language preference on rehospitalization. The results of the marginal structural model were expressed as an odds ratio of likelihood of readmission to the hospital from home health care.

RESULTS

Home health patients with a non-English language preference had a higher hospital readmission risk than English-speaking patients. Crude readmission rate for the limited English proficiency patients was 20.4% (95% CI, 19.9-21.0%) overall compared to 18.5% (95% CI, 18.7-19.2%) for English speakers (p < 0.001). Being a non-English-speaking patient was associated with an odds ratio of 1.011 (95% CI, 1.004-1.018) in increased hospital readmission rates from home health care (p = 0.001). There were also statistically significant differences in readmission rate by language group (p < 0.001), with Korean speakers having the lowest rate and Spanish speakers having the highest, when compared to English speakers.

CONCLUSIONS

People with a non-English language preference have a higher readmission rate from home health care. Hospital and home healthcare agencies may need specialized care coordination services to reduce readmission risk for these patients. Tweetable abstract: A new US-based study finds that home care patients with language barriers are at higher risk for hospital readmission.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2021 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2021 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, adverse pregnancy outcomes, vascular contributions to brain health, the global burden of cardiovascular disease, and further evidence-based approaches to changing behaviors related to cardiovascular disease.

RESULTS

Each of the 27 chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policy makers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Temporal Trends in Racial Differences in 30-Day Readmission and Mortality Rates After Acute Myocardial Infarction Among Medicare Beneficiaries

Importance

The association of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) with reductions in racial disparities in 30-day outcomes for myocardial infarction (MI), is unknown, including whether this varies by HRRP hospital penalty status.

Objective

To assess temporal trends in 30-day readmission and mortality rates among black and nonblack patients discharged after hospitalization for acute MI at low-performing and high-performing hospitals, as defined by readmission penalty status after HRRP implementation.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This observational cohort analysis used data from the multicenter National Cardiovascular Data Registry Chest Pain-MI Registry centers that were subject to the first cycle of HRRP, between January 1, 2008, and November 30, 2016. All patients hospitalized with MI who were included in National Cardiovascular Data Registry Chest Pain-MI Registry were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from April 2018 to September 2019.

Exposures

Hospital performance category and race (black compared with nonblack patients). Centers were classified as high performing or low performing based on the excess readmission ratio (predicted to expected 30-day risk adjusted readmission rate) for MI during the first HRRP cycle (in October 2012).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Thirty-day all-cause readmission and mortality rates.

Results

Among 753 hospitals that treated 155 397 patients with acute MI (of whom 11 280 [7.3%] were black), 399 hospitals (53.0%) were high performing. Thirty-day readmission rates declined over time in both black and nonblack patients (annualized 30-day readmission rate: 17.9% vs 20.8%). Black (compared with nonblack) race was associated with higher unadjusted odds of 30-day readmission in both low-performing and high-performing centers (odds ratios: before HRRP: low-performing hospitals, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.03-1.26]; P = .01; high-performing hospitals, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.04-1.32]; P = .01; after HRRP: low-performing hospitals, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.13-1.34]; P < .001; high-performing hospitals, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.12-1.39]; P < .001). However, these racial differences were not significant after adjustment for patient characteristics. The 30-day mortality rates declined significantly over time in nonblack patients, with stable (nonsignificant) temporal trends among black patients. Adjusted associations between race and 30-day mortality showed that 30-day mortality rates were significantly lower among black (compared with nonblack) patients in the low-performing hospitals (odds ratios: pre-HRRP, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.63-0.97]; P = .03; post-HRRP, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.68-0.95]; P = .01) but not in high-performing hospitals. Finally, the association between race and 30-day outcomes did not vary after the HRRP period began in either high-performing or low-performing hospitals.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this analysis, 30-day readmission rates among patients with MI declined over time for both black and nonblack patients. Differences in race-specific 30-day readmission rates persisted but appeared to be attributable to patient-level factors. The 30-day mortality rates have declined for nonblack patients and remained stable among black patients. Implementation of the HRRP was not associated with improvement or worsening of racial disparities in readmission and mortality rates.

Performance in Federal Value-Based Programs of Hospitals Recognized by the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology for High-Quality Heart Failure and Acute Myocardial Infarction Care

Importance

The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have implemented national value-based programs that incentivize hospitals to deliver better cardiovascular care. However, it is unclear how hospitals recognized for high-quality cardiovascular care by American Heart Association (AHA) and American College of Cardiology (ACC) national quality improvement initiatives (termed award hospitals) have performed under value-based programs.

Objective

To determine if hospitals that received awards for high-quality cardiovascular care from the AHA/ACC were less likely to be penalized under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) and the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program (VBP) compared with other hospitals.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This national cross-sectional study included data from short-term acute care hospitals in the United States that were participating in the HRRP or VBP in fiscal year 2018.

Exposures

Recognition awards for high-quality care from the AHA's Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure and ACC's Chest Pain-MI (myocardial infarction) Registry national quality improvement initiatives.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Proportion of hospitals that received a financial penalty or financial reward under the HRRP or VBP, median payment adjustments, and hospital-level 30-day mortality rates.

Results

This study included 3175 hospitals participating in the HRRP and 2781 hospitals participating in the VBP in fiscal year 2018. Under the HRRP, a higher proportion of award hospitals received financial penalties compared with other hospitals (419 [85.5%] vs 2112 [78.7%]; P < .001), although payment reductions were similar (median, 0.39% [interquartile range (IQR), 0.08%-0.84%] vs 0.33% [IQR, 0.03%-0.89%]; P = .17). Under the VBP, a higher proportion of award hospitals received penalties compared with other hospitals (250 [51.7%] vs 950 [41.4%]; P < .001), and fewer award hospitals received financial rewards (234 [48.4%] vs 1347 [58.6%]; P < .001). Median payment reductions were higher for award hospitals than other hospitals (0.01% [IQR, 0.00%-0.38%] vs 0.0% [IQR, 0.00%-0.28%]; P < .001), and median payment increases were lower (0.0% [IQR, 0.00%-0.34%] vs 0.13% [IQR, 0.00%-0.60%]; P < .001). Thirty-day mortality at award hospitals was similar (acute myocardial infarction, 13.2% vs 13.2%; P = .76) or slightly lower (heart failure, 11.3% vs 11.7%; P = .001) compared with other hospitals.

Conclusions and Relevance

Hospitals that received awards for high-quality cardiovascular care from the AHA/ACC were more likely to be penalized and less likely to be financially rewarded by federal value-based programs. These findings highlight the potential need to standardize measurement of cardiovascular care quality.

Associations Between Hospital Length of Stay, 30-Day Readmission, and Costs in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Nationwide Readmissions Database Analysis

Background Readmission after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) poses an enormous economic burden to the US healthcare system. There are limited data on the association between length of hospital stay (LOS), readmission rate, and overall costs in patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI. Methods and Results All STEMI hospitalizations were selected in the Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2010 to 2014. From the patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention, we examined the 30-day outcomes including readmission, mortality, reinfarction, repeat revascularization, and hospital charges/costs according to LOS (1-2, 3, 4, 5, and >5 days) stratified by infarct locations. The 30-day readmission rate after percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI was 12.0% in the anterior wall (AW) STEMI group and 9.9% in the non-AW STEMI group. Patients with a very short LOS (1-2 days) were readmitted less frequently than those with a longer LOS regardless of infarct locations. However, patients with a very short LOS had significantly increased 30-day readmission mortality versus an LOS of 3 days (hazard ratio, 1.91; CI, 1.16-3.16 [P=0.01]) only in the AW STEMI group. Total costs (index admission+readmission) were the lowest in the very short LOS cohort in both the AW STEMI group (P<0.001) and the non-AW STEMI group (P<0.001). Conclusions For patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI, a very short LOS was associated with significantly lower 30-day readmission and lower cumulative cost. However, a very short LOS was associated with higher 30-day mortality compared with at least a 3-day stay in the AW STEMI cohort.

Longitudinal trajectories of hospital performance across targeted cardiovascular conditions in the USA

AIMS

Thirty-day risk standardized readmission and mortality rates (RSRR, RSMR) are key determinants for hospital performance for cardiovascular conditions such as acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and heart failure (HF). We evaluated whether individual hospitals in the USA perform similarly for HF and AMI over time based on readmission and mortality metrics.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1950 hospitals in the USA with continuous participation in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) public reporting programme between 2010 and 2016 were identified. Latent mixture modelling was used to define performance trajectory groups. Overall, there were consistent declines in the RSMR (16.1-14.0%) and RSRR (20.3-16.6%) for AMI from 2010 to 2016. For HF, RSRR declined over time (25.1-21.7%), while there was a modest increase in RSMR (11.3-12.0%); parallel findings were observed across performance trajectory groups. The proportion of best performing centres for HF care that were also best performers for AMI care based on the 30-day RSMR and 30-day RSRR metric was 54% and 35%, respectively. Furthermore, the discordance rate between the best and worst performers for both conditions was low (<2% for both 30-day outcomes).

CONCLUSION

In the USA, despite variation in baseline hospital-level outcomes, hospitals had consistent longitudinal trajectories (worsening or improvement) across conditions and metrics. Hospitals identified as high performing were frequently similar across target conditions and over time, suggesting that performance may be driven by systems of care influencing different disease states in a comparable manner.

Association of Hospital Performance Based on 30-Day Risk-Standardized Mortality Rate With Long-term Survival After Heart Failure Hospitalization: An Analysis of the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry

Importance

Among patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF), the long-term clinical implications of hospitalization at hospitals based on 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates (RSMRs) is not known.

Objective

To evaluate the association of hospital-specific 30-day RSMR with long-term survival among patients hospitalized with HF in the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-HF registry.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The longitudinal observational study included 106 304 patients with HF who were admitted to 317 centers participating in the Get With The Guidelines-HF registry from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2013, and had Medicare-linked follow-up data. Hospital-specific 30-day RSMR was calculated using a hierarchical logistic regression model. In the model, 30-day mortality rate was a binary outcome, patient baseline characteristics were included as covariates, and the hospitals were treated as random effects. The association of 30-day RSMR-based hospital groups (low to high 30-day RSMR: quartile 1 [Q1] to Q4) with long-term (1-year, 3-year, and 5-year) mortality was assessed using adjusted Cox models. Data analysis took place from June 29, 2017, to February 19, 2018.

Exposures

Thirty-day RSMR for participating hospitals.

Main Outcomes and Measures

One-year, 3-year, and 5-year mortality rates.

Results

Of the 106 304 patients included in the analysis, 57 552 (54.1%) were women and 84 595 (79.6%) were white, and the median (interquartile range) age was 81 (74-87) years. The 30-day RSMR ranged from 8.6% (Q1) to 10.7% (Q4). Hospitals in the low 30-day RSMR group had greater availability of advanced HF therapies, cardiac surgery, and percutaneous coronary interventions. In the primary landmarked analyses among 30-day survivors, there was a graded inverse association between 30-day RSMR and long-term mortality (Q1 vs Q4: 5-year mortality, 73.7% vs 76.8%). In adjusted analysis, patients admitted to hospitals in the high 30-day RSMR group had 14% (95% CI, 10-18) higher relative hazards of 5-year mortality compared with those admitted to hospitals in the low 30-day RSMR group. Similar findings were observed in analyses of survival from admission, with 22% (95% CI, 18-26) higher relative hazards of 5-year mortality for patients admitted to Q4 vs Q1 hospitals.

Conclusions and Relevance

Lower hospital-level 30-day RSMR is associated with greater 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival for patients with HF. These differences in 30-day survival continued to accrue beyond 30 days and persisted long term, suggesting that 30-day RSMR may be a useful HF performance metric to incentivize quality care and improve long-term outcomes.

Hospital revisits within 30 days after discharge for medical conditions targeted by the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program in the United States: national retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine any changes in total hospital revisits within 30 days of discharge after a hospital stay for medical conditions targeted by the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Hospital stays among Medicare patients for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia between 1 January 2012 and 1 October 2015.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicare fee-for-service patients aged 65 or over.

MAIN OUTCOMES

Total hospital revisits within 30 days of discharge after hospital stays for medical conditions targeted by the HRRP, and by type of revisit: treat-and-discharge visit to an emergency department, observation stay (not leading to inpatient readmission), and inpatient readmission. Patient subgroups (age, sex, race) were also evaluated for each type of revisit.

RESULTS

Our study cohort included 3 038 740 total index hospital stays from January 2012 to September 2015: 1 357 620 for heart failure, 634 795 for acute myocardial infarction, and 1 046 325 for pneumonia. Counting all revisits after discharge, the total number of hospital revisits per 100 patient discharges for target conditions increased across the study period (monthly increase 0.023 visits per 100 patient discharges (95% confidence interval 0.010 to 0.035)). This change was due to monthly increases in treat-and-discharge visits to an emergency department (0.023 (0.015 to 0.032) and observation stays (0.022 (0.020 to 0.025)), which were only partly offset by declines in readmissions (-0.023 (-0.035 to -0.012)). Increases in observation stay use were more pronounced among non-white patients than white patients. No significant change was seen in mortality within 30 days of discharge for target conditions (-0.0034 (-0.012 to 0.0054)).

CONCLUSIONS

In the United States, total hospital revisits within 30 days of discharge for conditions targeted by the HRRP increased across the study period. This increase was due to a rise in post-discharge emergency department visits and observation stays, which exceeded the decline in readmissions. Although reductions in readmissions have been attributed to improvements in discharge planning and care transitions, our findings suggest that these declines could instead be because hospitals and clinicians have intensified efforts to treat patients who return to a hospital within 30 days of discharge in emergency departments and as observation stays.

The prevalence of 30-day readmission after acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

The 30‐day readmission is associated with increased medical costs, which has become an important quality metric in several medical institutions. This current study is aimed at clarifying the prevalence, the underlying risk factors, and reasons of the 30‐day readmission after acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were systematically searched to identify eligible studies. Random‐effect models were employed to perform pooled analyses. Means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to estimate prevalence and reasons for 30‐day readmission. We also used Odds ratios (ORs) to explore the potential significant predictors of risk factors of 30‐day readmission after AMI. Potential publication bias was assessed using funnel plot and Begg'test.

Results

A total of 14 relevant studies were included in this systematic review and meta‐analysis. The pooled 30‐day readmission rate of AMI was 12% (95% CI 0.11‐0.14). Acute coronary syndrome (ACS), angina and acute ischemic heart disease, and heart failure (HF) were the principal cardiovascular reasons of 30‐day readmission. Meanwhile, non‐specific chest pain was regarded as the significant cause among non‐cardiovascular reasons. The common co‐morbidities kidney disease, HF and diabetes mellitus were significant risk factors for 30‐day readmission. No significant publication bias was found by funnel plot and statistical tests.

Conclusions

The 30‐day readmission rate of post‐AMI ranged from 11% to 14% and can be mainly attributed to cardiovascular and non‐cardiovascular events. The common co‐morbidities, such as kidney disease, HF, and diabetes mellitus were significant risk factors for 30‐day readmission.

Association of the New Peer Group-Stratified Method With the Reclassification of Penalty Status in the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program

IMPORTANCE

Since the introduction of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP), readmission penalties have been applied disproportionately to institutions that serve low-income populations. To address this concern, the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid introduced a new, stratified payment adjustment method in fiscal year (FY; October 1 to September 30) 2019.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the introduction of a new, stratified payment adjustment method was associated with an alteration in the distribution of penalties among hospitals included in the HRRP.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this retrospective cross-sectional study, US hospitals included in the HRRP for FY 2018 and FY 2019 were identified. Penalty status of participating hospitals for FY 2019 was determined based on nonstratified HRRP methods and the new, stratified payment adjustment method. Hospitals caring for the highest proportion of patients enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid based on quintile were assigned to the low-socioeconomic status (SES) group.

EXPOSURES

Nonstratified and stratified Centers for Medicare & Medicaid payment adjustment methods.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Net reclassification of penalties among all hospitals and hospitals in the low-SES group, in states participating in Medicaid expansion, and for 4 targeted medical conditions (acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pneumonia).

RESULTS

Penalty status by both payment adjustment methods (nonstratified and stratified) was available for 3173 hospitals. For FY 2019, the new, stratified payment method was associated with penalties for 75.04% of hospitals (2381 of 3173), while the old, nonstratified method was associated with penalties for 79.07% (2509 hospitals), resulting in a net down-classification in penalty status for all hospitals by 4.03 percentage points (95% CI, 2.95-5.11; P < .001). For the 634 low-SES hospitals in the sample, the new method was associated with penalties for 77.60% of hospitals (492 of 634), while the old method was associated with penalties for 91.64% (581 hospitals), resulting in a net down-classification in penalty status of 14.04 percentage points (95% CI, 11.18-16.90; P < .001). Among hospitals that were not low SES (quintiles 1-4), the new payment method was associated with a small decrease in penalty status (1928 vs 1889; net down-classification, 1.54 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.38-2.69; P = .01). Among target medical conditions, the greatest reduction in penalties was observed among cardiovascular conditions (net down-classification, 6.18 percentage points; 95% CI, 4.96-7.39; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The new, stratified payment adjustment method for the HRRP was associated with a reduction in penalties across hospitals included in the program; the greatest reductions were observed among hospitals in the low-SES group, lessening but not eliminating the previously unbalanced penalty burden carried by these hospitals. Additional public policy research efforts are needed to achieve equitable payment adjustment models for all hospitals.

Association of the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program With Mortality Among Medicare Beneficiaries Hospitalized for Heart Failure, Acute Myocardial Infarction, and Pneumonia

IMPORTANCE

The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) has been associated with a reduction in readmission rates for heart failure (HF), acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and pneumonia. It is unclear whether the HRRP has been associated with change in patient mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the HRRP was associated with a change in patient mortality.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective cohort study of hospitalizations for HF, AMI, and pneumonia among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged at least 65 years across 4 periods from April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2015. Period 1 and period 2 occurred before the HRRP to establish baseline trends (April 2005-September 2007 and October 2007-March 2010). Period 3 and period 4 were after HRRP announcement (April 2010 to September 2012) and HRRP implementation (October 2012 to March 2015).

EXPOSURES

Announcement and implementation of the HRRP.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Inverse probability-weighted mortality within 30 days of discharge following hospitalization for HF, AMI, and pneumonia, and stratified by whether there was an associated readmission. An additional end point was mortality within 45 days of initial hospital admission for target conditions.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 8.3 million hospitalizations for HF, AMI, and pneumonia, among which 7.9 million (mean age, 79.6 [8.7] years; 53.4% women) were alive at discharge. There were 3.2 million hospitalizations for HF, 1.8 million for AMI, and 3.0 million for pneumonia. There were 270 517 deaths within 30 days of discharge for HF, 128 088 for AMI, and 246 154 for pneumonia. Among patients with HF, 30-day postdischarge mortality increased before the announcement of the HRRP (0.27% increase from period 1 to period 2). Compared with this baseline trend, HRRP announcement (0.49% increase from period 2 to period 3; difference in change, 0.22%, P = .01) and implementation (0.52% increase from period 3 to period 4; difference in change, 0.25%, P = .001) were significantly associated with an increase in postdischarge mortality. Among patients with AMI, HRRP announcement was associated with a decline in postdischarge mortality (0.18% pre-HRRP increase vs 0.08% post-HRRP announcement decrease; difference in change, -0.26%; P = .01) and did not significantly change after HRRP implementation. Among patients with pneumonia, postdischarge mortality was stable before HRRP (0.04% increase from period 1 to period 2), but significantly increased after HRRP announcement (0.26% post-HRRP announcement increase; difference in change, 0.22%, P = .01) and implementation (0.44% post-HPPR implementation increase; difference in change, 0.40%, P < .001). The overall increase in mortality among patients with HF and pneumonia was mainly related to outcomes among patients who were not readmitted but died within 30 days of discharge. For all 3 conditions, HRRP implementation was not significantly associated with an increase in mortality within 45 days of admission, relative to pre-HRRP trends.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among Medicare beneficiaries, the HRRP was significantly associated with an increase in 30-day postdischarge mortality after hospitalization for HF and pneumonia, but not for AMI. Given the study design and the lack of significant association of the HRRP with mortality within 45 days of admission, further research is needed to understand whether the increase in 30-day postdischarge mortality is a result of the policy.

Assessing Performance and Quality After Non-ST Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes and discusses the evidence base supporting current performance and quality measures used in assessing institutions in their care of patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Professional societies in the USA and Europe have developed performance and quality measures for NSTE-ACS. These measures are reviewed and updated periodically to reflect the most important evidence from the literature. In the USA, the ACC/AHA Task Force on Performance Measures published the updated 2017 AHA/ACC Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction. In Europe, the ESC Acute Cardiac Care Association published the 2017 Quality Indicators for acute myocardial infarction. These documents build on guidelines previously developed and published by the two organizations. They include detailed reviews of current and past studies establishing that adherence with guidelines improves clinical outcomes. Both measure sets provide quantitative methodologies to assess program performance. Institutional programs that focus on these validated measures can increase guideline adherence, streamline and standardize care processes, and reduce morbidity and mortality. Performance and quality measures have become a critical part of healthcare today, allowing patients, providers, administrators, and payors to assess patient care objectively. They are also becoming an important component of value-based payment programs. To be fair, and useful, for internal institutional assessment, in comparing different institutions, and for value-based payments, only validated performance measures such as these should be employed.