Reducing hospital use and expenditures through utilization review. Findings from an outcome evaluation

The Effect of Utilization Review on Emergency Department Operations

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Increasingly, hospitals are using utilization review software to reduce hospital admissions in an effort to contain costs. Such practices have the potential to increase the number of unsafe discharges, particularly in public safety-net hospitals. Utilization review software tools are not well studied with regard to their effect on emergency department (ED) operations. We study the effect of prospectively used admission decision support on ED operations.

METHODS

In 2012, Los Angeles County + University of Southern California Medical Center implemented prospective use of computerized admission criteria. After implementation, only ED patients meeting primary review (diagnosis-based criteria) or secondary review (medical necessity as determined by an on-site emergency physician) were assigned inpatient beds. Data were extracted from electronic medical records from September 2011 through December 2013. Outcomes included operational metrics, 30-day ED revisits, and 30-day admission rates. Excluding a 6-month implementation period, monthly summary metrics were compared pre- and postimplementation with nonparametric and negative binomial regression methods. All adult ED visits, excluding incarcerated and purely behavioral health visits, were analyzed. The primary outcomes were disposition rates. Secondary outcomes were 30-day ED revisits, 30-day admission rate among return visitors to the ED, and estimated cost.

RESULTS

Analysis of 245,662 ED encounters was performed. The inpatient admission rate decreased from 14.2% to 12.8%. Increases in discharge rate (82.4% to 83.4%) and ED observation unit utilization (2.5% to 3.4%) were found. Thirty-day revisits increased (20.4% to 24.4%), although the 30-day admission rate decreased (3.2% to 2.8%). Estimated cost savings totaled $193.17 per ED visit.

CONCLUSION

The prospective application of utilization review software in the ED led to a decrease in the admission rate. This was tempered by a concomitant increase in ED observation unit utilization and 30-day ED revisits. Cost savings suggest that resources should be redirected to the more highly affected ED and ED observation unit, although more work is needed to confirm the generalizability of these findings.

Hospital adaptation to risk-bearing: managerial implications of changes in purchaser-provider contracting

A number of countries have adopted contracting reforms in which hospitals are placed at financial risk. This risk has stimulated a number of adaptive strategies to achieve organizational success. This paper presents a model of six forms of contracting relationships and reviews the adaptation strategies observed in three health systems: the USA, England and the Netherlands. These strategies include service diversification, improved management information systems, the employment of marketing and contract managers, the use of clinical pathways, case management and concurrent/retrospective review of hospital stays, quality management and quality assurance programs, pre-admission authorization, discharge planning, and physician profiling and participation in management. These adaptive strategies have three implications for managers: increased 'partnering', with purchasers, collaboration with medical staff, and assumption of managed care roles. Two groups of institutions are at risk from the changes in hospital contracting: university teaching hospitals and inner-city hospitals serving socially deprived populations. The paper ends with implications for the education of hospital managers and research on hospital management and adaptation to contracting.

Relationship between practice characteristics of primary care internists and unnecessary hospital days

BACKGROUND

Inpatient utilization review remains a useful approach for hospitals to achieve cost savings, however utilization review efforts need to become more focused and sophisticated.

METHODS

In order to identify physicians with a higher percentage of unnecessary hospital days, and to analyze how their practice characteristics distinguished them from their colleagues, 364 consecutive admissions of 57 primary care internists were reviewed concurrently, on a daily basis. Days without acute hospital level of care that occurred while patients were awaiting placement in a rehabilitation or in a chronic care facility were adjusted out of the calculation. Analysis was undertaken to assess the impact of physician age, location of training, Board Certification, practice location, participation in medical training programs, years of experience, and participation in various types of managed-care programs on the level of unnecessary hospital days. Characteristics of the patients and their illnesses were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

A large number of unnecessary hospital days occurred although there was no useful segregation of good from poor physician utilizers. Board certification and suburban practice location were associated with a significantly lower percentage of adjusted unnecessary days. Physician members of a closed-panel health maintenance organization had a lower percentage of adjusted unnecessary hospital days (14% vs. 41%, P < .001) when compared with the other primary care internists. Explanations for the difference are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

1) The patients of primary care internists are still responsible for a large number of unnecessary hospital days; 2) Utilization review efforts need to become more sophisticated and focused; and 3) A change in physician incentives coupled with appropriate staff and systems possibly would be the simplest, large-scale remedy.

Computerized decision support for concurrent utilization review using the HELP system

OBJECTIVE

Development and evaluation of computerized concurrent utilization review (UR) support taking advantage of a clinically rich computerized patient database.

DESIGN

The Automated Support System for Utilization Review (ASSURE) applies the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) Day of Care criteria to computerized patient data in the HELP hospital information system. This paper reports the development, verification, and validation of ASSURE.

MEASUREMENTS

Implementation correctness was verified by measuring agreement with a nurse reviewer, using separate sample sets for all 20 criteria for a total of 560 current inpatients. Usefulness in detecting inappropriate days of care was validated by two nurse reviewers who were crossed with manual and computer-assisted review methods in a blocked design for 168 current inpatients. Agreement with reviewers, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were measured.

RESULTS

Agreement was very good for satisfaction of criteria, and good for appropriateness of day of care. A patient day identified by ASSURE as potentially inappropriate would be twice as likely to be judged inappropriate by a reviewer as a randomly selected patient day. Review of the 10% of patient days identified as potentially inappropriate by ASSURE would identify approximately 21% of the inappropriate days of care.

CONCLUSION

ASSURE is a clinically useful tool for screening adult acute care patients for inappropriate days of care, and promises to make a major contribution to reducing health care costs. The prognosis for successful routine clinical use is good.

Problems with expanding Medicaid for the uninsured

Many proposals for financing health care for the uninsured recommend expanding the Medicaid program. They often advocate extending Medicaid to all those under the poverty level and standardizing program benefits. However, the proposals have ignored important problems that must be resolved if the plans are to be successfully implemented, the most serious being the fiscal impacts that such proposals would have on states. The current Medicaid matching formula fails to reflect either the size of a state's Medicaid program or its ability to pay for it. As a result, the proportional fiscal effort that expansion proposals would require of states would greatly exceed that required of the federal government. Additionally, the fiscal impact would vary widely and have little relationship to a state's current Medicaid program generosity. Besides fiscal problems, significant differences exist between Medicaid and private plans in the areas of benefits, cost sharing, managed care, cost containment, and provider payment. Under a national system of health care, these differences would limit program economies, and create problems with perceived equity, continuity of care, and migration effects.