Certificate of need programs, intensity modulated radiation therapy use and the cost of prostate cancer care

Certificate-of-Need Programs Are Associated with a Reduced Incidence, Expenditure, and Rate of Complications with Respect to Knee Arthroscopy in the Medicare Population

BACKGROUND

To curb costs at the state level, improve care quality, and promote access to care, certificate-of-need (CON) laws were established in many states in 1974. It is not known how CON regulations have affected the provision of knee arthroscopy, one of the most common orthopedic procedures performed in the USA.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We sought to characterize the effects of CON regulations on knee arthroscopy in the national Medicare population by examining trends in procedure volumes, comparing trends in procedure charges, evaluating distribution of procedure volumes between high-, mid-, and low-volume facilities, and comparing adverse event and complication rates after knee arthroscopy between states with and without CON regulations.

METHODS

States with CON regulations covering both inpatient and outpatient operating rooms formed the study group (n = 25 states) and were compared with states without CON laws or laws that did not cover operating rooms during the study period (n = 20 states). The 100% Medicare Standard Analytical Files from 2005 through 2014 were used to compare knee arthroscopy procedure volumes, charges, reimbursements, distribution of procedures based on facility volumes and adverse events between the two groups.

RESULTS

The rate of decrease in the incidence of knee arthroscopy was significantly greater in CON states than that in non-CON states. CON states also had significantly lower charges at all time points, and overall, compared with non-CON states. There were significantly more high- and mid-volume facilities in CON states than in non-CON states, and there were significantly more low-volume facilities in non-CON states than in CON states. Finally, there were significantly higher rates of emergency room visits within 30 days and infection within 6 months in non-CON states than in CON states.

CONCLUSIONS

CON regulations appear to have achieved several of their intended goals for knee arthroscopy. Further research is needed to determine if CON regulations affect the quality and sustainability of care provided to patients undergoing knee arthroscopy.

The Influence of Hospital Market Competition on Patient Mortality and Total Performance Score

The Affordable Care Act of 2010 launch of Medicare Value-Based Purchasing has become the platform for payment reform. It is a mechanism by which buyers of health care services hold providers accountable for high-quality and cost-effective care. The objective of the study was to examine the relationship between quality of hospital care and hospital competition using the quality-quantity behavioral model of hospital behavior. The quality-quantity behavioral model of hospital behavior was used as the conceptual framework for this study. Data from the American Hospital Association database, the Hospital Compare database, and the Area Health Resources Files database were used. Multivariate regression analysis was used to examine the effect of hospital competition on patient mortality. Hospital market competition was significantly and negatively related to the 3 mortality rates. Consistent with the literature, hospitals located in more competitive markets had lower mortality rates for patients with acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia. The results suggest that hospitals may be more readily to compete on quality of care and patient outcomes. The findings are important because policies that seek to control and negatively influence a competitive hospital environment, such as Certificate of Need legislation, may negatively affect patient mortality rates. Therefore, policymakers should encourage the development of policies that facilitate a more competitive and transparent health care marketplace to potentially and significantly improve patient mortality.

Does Certificate of Need Minimize Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Use in Patients with Low Risk Prostate Cancer?

PURPOSE

Certificate of Need (CON) laws are optional from state to state, and are meant to limit proliferation of certain unnecessary medical facilities. Theoretically, CON should limit the use of IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy) in the population who likely would benefit from it the least: older or debilitated men with low risk prostate cancer. We evaluated the effect of CON on IMRT use in these patients in a population-based cohort.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database linked with Medicare files, we identified male residents of SEER regions who were diagnosed in 2004-2009 with low- risk prostate cancer (T1, Gleason≤6, PSA<10) and were either ≥70 years old or ≥65 years old with Charlson comorbidity score ≥ 2. The endpoint was percentage of newly diagnosed patients who were treated with IMRT within 12 month of cancer diagnosis. Logistic regression was used to assess the impact of CON laws on IMRT use.

RESULTS

Over 37% (4,491) of the patients came from states with radiation oncology CON laws, whereas 63% (7,572) came from non-CON states. IMRT was performed on 30% of CON patients versus 28% of non-CON patients. Logistic regression analysis revealed that IMRT was utilized more often in CON states than in non-CON states, odds ratio (OR) 1.13 (95% CI 1.04-1.23, p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

CON laws do not effectively limit use of IMRT in older or debilitated patients with low risk prostate cancer.

Locoregional prostate cancer treatment pattern variation in independent cancer centers: policy effect, patient preference, or physician incentive?

Surveillance, Epidemiologic, and End Results (SEER) registry data abstracted from a priority 2 or higher reporting source from 2006 to 2008 were used to compare treatment patterns in 45–64-year old men diagnosed with locoregional prostate cancer (LRPC) across states with or without radiation therapy-directed certificate of need (CON) laws and across independent cancer centers (ICCs) compared to large multi-specialty groups (LMSGs). Adjusted treatment percentages for the five most common LRPC treatments (surgery, external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), combination brachytherapy with EBRT, brachytherapy, and observation) were compared using cross-sectional logistic regression between CON-unregulated and -regulated states and between LMSGs and ICCs. LRPC EBRT rates were no different across CON regions, but are increased in ICCs compared to LMSGs (37.00% vs. 13.23%, P < 0.001). Variation in LRPC treatment patterns by reporting source merits further scrutiny under the Affordable Care Act of 2010, considering the intent of incentivized accountable care organizations (ACOs) established by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA) and the implications of early descriptions of these new healthcare provider organizations on prostate cancer treatment patterns.