The Effects of Medicare Advantage Contract Concentration on Patients' Nursing Home Outcomes

Fall risk and cardiovascular outcomes of first-line antihypertensive medications in nursing home residents

BACKGROUND

Little evidence exists about the comparative effects of first-line antihypertensive medications (i.e., renin-angiotensin-aldosterone converting enzyme inhibitors (RAASi), amlodipine, or thiazide diuretics) in older adults with limited life expectancy. We compared the rates of injurious falls and short-term cardiovascular events between different first-line antihypertensive medication classes in adults receiving care in nursing homes (NH).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries receiving care in NHs. Patients newly dispensed first-line antihypertensive medications were identified using Part D claims (2015-2018) and linked with clinical assessments (i.e., Minimum Data Set). Fall-related injuries (FRI), hip fractures, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) outcomes were identified using hospitalization claims. Patients were followed from the date of antihypertensive dispensing until the occurrence of outcomes, death, disenrollment, or 6-month follow-up. Inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted (IPTW) cause-specific hazards regression models were used to compare outcomes between patients who were new users of RAASi, amlodipine, or thiazides.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 16,504 antihypertensive users (RAASi, n = 9574; amlodipine, n = 5049; thiazide, n = 1881). Mean age was 83.5 years (± 8.2), 70.6% were female, and 17.2% were non-white race. During a mean follow-up of 5.3 months, 326 patients (2.0%) experienced an injurious fall, 1590 (9.6%) experienced MACE, and 2123 patients (12.9%) died. The intention-to-treat IPTW hazard ratio (HR) for injurious falls for amlodipine (vs RAASi) use was 0.85 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.08) and for thiazides (vs RAASi) was 1.22 (95% CI 0.88-1.66). The rates of MACE were similar between those taking anti-hypertensive medications. Thiazides were discontinued more often than other classes; however, inferences were largely unchanged in as-treated analyses. Subgroup analyses were generally consistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults with limited life expectancy experience similar rates of injurious falls and short-term cardiovascular events after initiating any of the first-line antihypertensive medications.

Medicare Advantage Patterns of Poststroke Discharge to an Inpatient Rehabilitation or Skilled Nursing Facility: A Consideration of Demographic, Functional, and Payer Factors

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the factors influencing the discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) or a skilled nursing facility (SNF) of people poststroke with Medicare Advantage plans.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted with data from naviHealth, a company that manages postacute care discharge placement on behalf of Medicare Advantage organizations. The dependent variable was discharge destination (IRF or SNF). Variables included age, sex, prior living setting, functional status (Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care [AM-PAC]), acute hospital length of stay, comorbidities, and payers (health plans). Analysis estimated relative risk (RR) of discharge to SNF, while controlling for regional variation.

RESULTS

Individuals discharged to an SNF were older (RR = 1.17), women (RR = 1.05), lived at home alone or in assisted living (RR = 1.13 and 1.39, respectively), had comorbidities impacting their function "some" or "severely" (RR = 1.43 and 1.81, respectively), and had a length of stay greater than 5 days (RR = 1.16). Individuals with better AM-PAC Basic Mobility (RR = 0.95) went to an IRF, and individuals with better Daily Activity (RR = 1.01) scores went to an SNF. There was a substantial, significant variation in discharge of individuals to SNF by payer group (RR range = 1.12-1.92).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that individuals poststroke are more likely to be discharged to an SNF than to an IRF. This study did not find a different discharge decision-making picture for those with Medicare Advantage plans than previously described for other insurance programs.

IMPACT

Medicare Advantage payers have varied patterns in discharge placement to an IRF or SNF for patients poststroke.

Comparing Receipt of Prescribed Post-acute Home Health Care Between Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries: an Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Medicare Advantage (MA) covers more than 1/3rd of all Medicare beneficiaries. MA plans are required to provide the same benefits as Traditional Medicare (TM), but can impose utilization management tools to control costs.

OBJECTIVE

To assess differences between TM and MA enrollees in the probability of receiving prescribed post-acute home health (HH) care and to describe MA plan characteristics associated with HH receipt.

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of claims data, HH patient assessment data, and MA plan data from 2011 to 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 and older with an incident hospitalization for joint replacement, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, stroke, urinary tract infection, septicemia, acute renal failure, or congestive heart failure.

MAIN MEASURES

Receipt of prescribed HH as indicated by a HH discharge code and corresponding HH patient assessment within 14 days of hospital discharge.

KEY RESULTS

There were 2,723,245 beneficiaries prescribed HH at discharge (68% TM, 32% MA). About 75% of TM enrollees and 62% of MA enrollees received prescribed post-acute HH. In adjusted analyses, MA enrollees had an -11.7 percentage point (pp) (95% confidence interval (CI): -16.8, -6.5) lower probability of receiving HH compared with TM enrollees. In adjusted analyses, HMO enrollees in plans with cost sharing (- 8.4 pp; 95% CI: - 14.3, - 2.5), referrals (- 3.7 pp; 95% CI: - 6.1, - 1.2), and pre-authorization (- 5.1 pp; 95% CI: - 8.3, - 2.0) were less likely to receive prescribed HH. In adjusted analyses, PPO enrollees in plans with cost sharing were -7.0 pp (95% CI: - 12.7, - 1.4) less likely to receive HH, but there was no difference for those with referrals (1.1 pp; 95% CI, - 1.5, 3.7) or pre-authorization (1.6 pp; 95% CI: - 0.6, - 3.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Among Medicare beneficiaries, MA enrollees were less likely to receive prescribed post-acute HH compared with TM. As enrollment in MA continues to grow, it is important to examine how differences in utilization relate to outcomes.

The Effects of Accountable Care Organizations Forming Preferred Skilled Nursing Facility Networks on Market Share, Patient Composition, and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Through participation in payment reforms such as bundled payment and accountable care organizations (ACOs), hospitals are increasingly financially responsible for health care use and adverse health events occurring after hospital discharge. To improve management and coordination of postdischarge care, ACO hospitals are establishing a closer relationship with skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) through the formation of preferred SNF networks.

RESEARCH DESIGN

We evaluated the effects of preferred SNF network formation on care patterns and outcomes. We included 10 ACOs that established preferred SNF networks between 2014 and 2015 in the sample. We first investigated whether hospitals "steer" patients to preferred SNFs by examining the percentage of patients sent to preferred SNFs within each hospital before and after network formation. We then used a difference-in-difference model with SNF fixed effects to evaluate the changes in patient composition and outcomes of preferred SNF patients from ACO hospitals after network formation relative to patients from other hospitals.

RESULTS

We found that preferred network formation was not associated with higher market share or better outcomes for preferred SNF patients from ACO hospitals. However, we found a small increase in the average number of Elixhauser comorbidities for patients from ACO hospitals after network formation, relative to patients from non-ACO hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

After preferred SNF network formation, there is some evidence that ACO hospitals sent more complex patients to preferred SNFs, but there was no change in the volume of patients received by these SNFs. Furthermore, preferred network formation was not associated with improvement in patient outcomes.