Payer incentives and physical rehabilitation therapy for nonelderly institutional long-term care residents: evidence from Michigan and Ontario

The Effect of Medicare's Prospective Payment System on Discharge Outcomes of Skilled Nursing Facility Residents

In July 1998, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) changed the payment method for Medicare (Part A) skilled nursing facility (SNF) care from a cost-based system to a prospective payment system (PPS). Unlike the previous cost-based payment system, PPS restricts skilled nursing facility payment to pre-determined levels. CMS also reduced the total payments to SNFs coincident with PPS implementation. These changes might reduce quality of care at skilled nursing facilities and could be reflected in resident discharge patterns. The present study examines the effect of the 1998 policy change on resident discharge outcomes. The results indicate that PPS reduced the relative risk of discharge to home and to death for Medicare residents (compared to non-Medicare residents) and had no significant effect on hospitalizations or transfers.

Medicare skilled nursing facility reimbursement and upcoding

Post-acute care provided by skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) is reimbursed by Medicare under a prospective payment system using resource utilization groups (RUGs) that adjust payment intensity on the basis of predefined ranges of weekly therapy minutes provided and the functionality of the patient. Individual RUGs account for differences in the intensity of care provided, but there exists significant regional variation in the payments SNFs receive from Medicare due to the use of geographic adjustment factors. This paper is the first to use this geographic variation in the generosity of Medicare reimbursement to empirically test if SNFs respond to payment differences between RUG categories. The results are highly suggestive that SNFs upcode patients by providing additional therapy minutes to increase revenue, whereas we find no evidence of upcoding related to patient functionality scores. Simulating how different payment differentials affect RUG selection, we predict that reducing the financial incentive to upcode could result in significant savings to Medicare.

Attractiveness of employment sectors for physical therapists in Ontario, Canada (1999-2007): implication for the long term care sector

Background

Recruiting and retaining health professions remains a high priority for health system planners. Different employment sectors may vary in their appeal to providers. We used the concepts of inflow and stickiness to assess the relative attractiveness of sectors for physical therapists (PTs) in Ontario, Canada. Inflow was defined as the percentage of PTs working in a sector who were not there the previous year. Stickiness was defined as the transition probability that a physical therapist will remain in a given employment sector year-to-year.

Methods

A longitudinal dataset of registered PTs in Ontario (1999-2007) was created, and primary employment sector was categorized as ‘hospital’, ‘community’, ‘long term care’ (LTC) or ‘other.’ Inflow and stickiness values were then calculated for each sector, and trends were analyzed.

Results

There were 5003 PTs in 1999, which grew to 6064 by 2007, representing a 21.2% absolute growth. Inflow grew across all sectors, but the LTC sector had the highest inflow of 32.0%. PTs practicing in hospitals had the highest stickiness, with 87.4% of those who worked in this sector remaining year-to-year. The community and other employment sectors had stickiness values of 78.2% and 86.8% respectively, while the LTC sector had the lowest stickiness of 73.4%.

Conclusion

Among all employment sectors, LTC had highest inflow but lowest stickiness. Given expected increases in demand for services, understanding provider transitional probabilities and employment preferences may provide a useful policy and planning tool in developing a sustainable health human resource base across all employment sectors.

Recovery of activities of daily living in older adults after hospitalization for acute medical illness

OBJECTIVES

To compare functional outcomes in the year after discharge for older adults discharged from the hospital after an acute medical illness with a new or additional disability in their basic self-care activities of daily living (ADL) (compared with preadmission baseline 2 weeks before admission) with those of older adults discharged with baseline ADL function and identify predictors of failure to recover to baseline function 1 year after discharge.

DESIGN

Observational.

SETTING

Tertiary care hospital, community teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Older (aged >or=70) patients nonelectively admitted to general medical services (1993-1998).

MEASUREMENTS

Number of ADL disabilities at preadmission baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after discharge. Outcomes were death, sustained decline in ADL function, and recovery to baseline ADL function at each time point.

RESULTS

By 12 months after discharge, of those discharged with new or additional ADL disability, 41.3% died, 28.6% were alive but had not recovered to baseline function, and 30.1% were at baseline function. Of those discharged at baseline function, 17.8% died, 15.2% were alive but with worse than baseline function, and 67% were at their baseline function (P<.001). Of those discharged with new or additional ADL disability, the presence or absence of recovery by 1 month was associated with long-term outcomes. Age, cardiovascular disease, dementia, cancer, low albumin, and greater number of dependencies in instrumental ADLs independently predicted failure to recover.

CONCLUSION

For older adults discharged with new or additional disability in ADL after hospitalization for medical illness, prognosis for functional recovery is poor. Rehabilitation interventions of longer duration and timing than current reimbursement allows, caregiver support, and palliative care should be evaluated.

Factors associated with physiotherapy provision in a population of elderly nursing home residents; a cross sectional study

Background

Although physiotherapy (PT) plays an important role in improving activities of daily living (ADL functioning) and discharge rates, it is unclear how many nursing home residents receive treatment. Furthermore, there is a lack of insight into the determinants that influence the decision for treatment. In this study, we investigated how many nursing home residents receive PT. In addition, we analysed the factors that contribute to the variation in the provision of PT both between nursing homes and between residents.

Methods

A random sample of 600 elderly residents was taken from a random sample of 15 nursing homes. Residents had to be admitted for rehabilitation or for long-term care. Data were collected through interviews with the nursing home physician and the physiotherapist. Multilevel analysis was used to define the variation in the provision of PT and the factors that are associated with the question whether a resident receives PT or not. Furthermore the amount of PT provided was analysed and the factors that are associated with this.

Results

On average 69% of the residents received PT. The percentage of patients receiving treatment differed significantly across nursing homes, and especially the number of physiotherapists available, explained this difference between nursing homes. Residents admitted to a somatic ward for rehabilitation, and male residents in general, were most likely to receive PT. Residents who were treated by a physiotherapist received on average 55 minutes (sd 41) treatment a week. Residents admitted for rehabilitation received more PT a week, as were residents with a status after a total hip replacement.

Conclusion

PT is most likely to be provided to residents on a somatic ward, recently admitted for rehabilitation to a nursing home, which has a relatively large number of physiotherapists. This suggests a potential under-use of PT for long-term residents with cognitive problems. It is recommended that physiotherapists reconsider which residents may benefit from treatment. This may require a shift in the focus of physiotherapists from 'recovery and discharge' to 'quality of life and well-being'.