Utilization of ACP CPT codes among high-need Medicare beneficiaries in 2017: A brief report

Timing and setting of billed advance care planning among Medicare decedents in 2017-2019

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) began to reimburse clinicians for advance care planning (ACP) discussions, effective January 1, 2016. We sought to characterize the timing and setting of first-billed ACP discussions among Medicare decedents to inform future research on ACP billing codes.

METHODS

Using a random 20% sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 66 years and older who died in 2017-2019, we described the timing (relative to death) and setting (inpatient, nursing home, office, or outpatient with or without Medicare Annual Wellness Visit [AWV], home or community, or elsewhere) of the first-billed ACP discussion for each beneficiary.

RESULTS

Our study included 695,985 decedents (mean [SD] years of age, 83.2 [8.8]; 54.2% female); the proportion of decedents who had at least one billed ACP discussion increased from 9.7% in 2017 to 21.9% in 2019. We found that the proportion of first-billed ACP discussions held during the last month of life decreased from 37.0% in 2017 to 26.2% in 2019, while the proportion of first-billed ACP discussions held more than 12 months before death increased from 11.1% in 2017 to 35.2% in 2019. We also found that the proportion of first-billed ACP discussions held in the office or outpatient setting along with AWV increased over time (from 10.7% in 2017 to 14.1% in 2019), while the proportion held in the inpatient setting decreased (from 41.7% in 2017 to 38.0% in 2019).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that with increasing exposure to the CMS policy change, uptake of the ACP billing code has increased; first-billed ACP discussions are occurring sooner before the end-of-life stage and are more likely to occur with AWV. Future studies should evaluate changes in ACP practice patterns, rather than only an increasing uptake in ACP billing codes, following the policy implementation.

Advance Care Planning, Shared Decision Making, and Serious Illness Conversations in Onconephrology

Advance care planning, shared decision making, and serious illness conversations are communication processes designed to promote patient-centered care. In onconephrology, patients face a series of complex medical decisions regarding their care at the intersection of oncology and nephrology. Clinicians who aim to ensure that patient preferences and values are integrated into treatment planning must work within a similarly complex care team comprising multiple disciplines. In this review, we describe key decision points in a patient's care trajectory, as well as guidance on how and when to engage in advance care planning, shared decision making, and serious illness discussions. Further research on these processes in the complex context of onconephrology is needed.

Advance Care Planning Among Patients With Advanced Illness Presenting to the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning (ACP) benefits emergency department (ED) patients with advanced illness. Although Medicare implemented physician reimbursement for ACP discussions in 2016, early studies found limited uptake.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a pilot study to assess ACP documentation and billing to inform the development of ED-based interventions to increase ACP.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review to quantify the proportion of ED patients with advanced illness with Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) or coding of ACP discussion in the medical record. We surveyed a subset of patients via phone to evaluate ACP participation.

RESULTS

Of 186 patients included in the chart review, 68 (37%) had a POLST and none had ACP discussions billed. Of 50 patients surveyed, 18 (36%) recalled prior ACP discussions.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the low uptake of ACP discussions in ED patients with advanced illness, the ED may be an underused setting for interventions to increase ACP discussions and documentation.

Actual vs Documented Advance Care Planning in a Primary Care Clinic

Introduction

Advance care planning (ACP) is a complex and multifaceted entity that has significant impact on patient care. ACP takes many forms, may be underbilled, and can have significant ramifications on quality care metrics. We performed a retrospective chart review for patients over 70 years in age in our family medicine resident clinic to evaluate the ways in which ACP is charted and the gap between billed and nonbilled ACP.

Methods

The first 50 patients over 70 years in age seen between August 25, 2020 and September 25, 2020 were selected for standardized chart review. Billing for ACP was defined as Current Procedural Terminology codes=-10 codes 99497 or 99498. Primary outcomes were the percentage of patients with ACP and incidence of ACP documents. Secondary outcome was the proportion of documented ACP conversations in office visits which had billing for ACP.

Results

Forty-eight patients over 70 years in age were identified with an average age of 80.9 years old. Forty-one of 48 patients (85.4%) had some form of ACP and 12 (25%) had formal ACP documents. Of 25 patients with documented ACP conversations in office visits, eleven patients (44%) had ACP which had been formally billed.

Conclusion

The majority of our patients had some form of ACP ranging from inpatient discussions of code status to outpatient visits regarding end-of-life care. However, ACP was underbilled in our practice. Physicians are often evaluated based on quality care metrics such as billed ACP which may not accurately reflect the work physicians are doing.

Practice Billing for Medicare Advance Care Planning Across the USA

BACKGROUND

Medicare introduced billing codes in 2016 to encourage clinicians to engage in advance care planning (ACP) and promote goal-concordantend-of-life care, but uptake has been modest. While prior research examined individual-level factors in ACP billing, organization-level factors associated with physician practices billing for ACP remain unknown.

OBJECTIVE

Examine the role of practices in ACP billing.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study analyzing 2016-2018 national Medicare data.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 53,926 practices with at least 10 attributed Medicare beneficiaries.

MAIN MEASURES

Outcomes were practice-level ACP billing (any use by the practice) and ACP use rate by practice-attributed beneficiaries. Practice characteristics were number of beneficiaries attributed to the practice; percentage of beneficiaries by race, Medicare-Medicaid dual enrollment, sex, and age; practice size; and specialty mix.

KEY RESULTS

Fifteen percent of practices billed for ACP. In adjusted models, we found higher odds of ACP billing and higher ACP use rates among practices with more primary care physicians (billing AOR: 10.01, 95%CI: 8.81-11.38 for practices with 75-100% (vs 0) primary care physicians), and those serving more Medicare beneficiaries (billing AOR: 4.55, 95%CI 4.08-5.08 for practices with highest (vs lowest) quintile of beneficiaries), and larger shares of female beneficiaries (billing AOR: 3.06, 95% CI 2.01-4.67 for 75-100% (vs <25%) female ).

CONCLUSIONS

Several years after Medicare introduced ACP reimbursements for physicians, relatively few practices bill for ACP. ACP billing was more likely in large practices with a greater percentage of primary care physicians. To increase ACP billing uptake, policymakers and health system leaders might target interventions to larger practices where a small number of physicians already bill for ACP and to specialty practices that serve as the primary source of care for seriously ill patients.

Natural Language Processing to Identify Advance Care Planning Documentation in a Multisite Pragmatic Clinical Trial

CONTEXT

Large multisite clinical trials studying decision-making when facing serious illness require an efficient method for abstraction of advance care planning (ACP) documentation from clinical text documents. However, the current gold standard method of manual chart review is time-consuming and unreliable.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the ability to use natural language processing (NLP) to identify ACP documention in clinical notes from patients participating in a multisite trial.

METHODS

Patients with advanced cancer followed in three disease-focused oncology clinics at Duke Health, Mayo Clinic, and Northwell Health were identified using administrative data. All outpatient and inpatient notes from patients meeting inclusion criteria were extracted from electronic health records (EHRs) between March 2018 and March 2019. NLP text identification software with semi-automated chart review was applied to identify documentation of four ACP domains: (1) conversations about goals of care, (2) limitation of life-sustaining treatment, (3) involvement of palliative care, and (4) discussion of hospice. The performance of NLP was compared to gold standard manual chart review.

RESULTS

435 unique patients with 79,797 notes were included in the study. In our validation data set, NLP achieved F1 scores ranging from 0.84 to 0.97 across domains compared to gold standard manual chart review. NLP identified ACP documentation in a fraction of the time required by manual chart review of EHRs (1-5 minutes per patient for NLP, vs. 30-120 minutes for manual abstraction).

CONCLUSION

NLP is more efficient and as accurate as manual chart review for identifying ACP documentation in studies with large patient cohorts.

Association Between Subjective Remaining Life Expectancy and Advance Care Planning in Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study

CONTEXT

Advance care planning (ACP) becomes more relevant with deteriorating health or increasing age. People might be more inclined to engage in ACP as they feel that they are approaching end of life. The perception of approaching end of life could be quantified as subjective remaining life expectancy (SRLE).

OBJECTIVES

First, to describe the prevalence of ACP with health care providers or written directives ("formal engagement in ACP") and ACP with loved-ones ("informal engagement in ACP") among older persons in the general population in The Netherlands. Second, to assess the association between SRLE and engagement in ACP.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study using data from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA) measurement wave of 2015-2016. Participants (n = 1585) were aged ≥ 57 years.

RESULTS

Median age was 69.4 years (IQR: 64.1-76.7), and median SRLE 25.9 years (17.7-36.0). Formal engagement in ACP was present in 32.6%, informal without formal engagement in 45.8%, and 21.6% was not engaged in ACP. For respondents with SRLE < 25 years, there was a nonstatistically significant association between SRLE and engagement in ACP (aOR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.93-1.01; P= .088), and a statistically significant, small association with formal vs. informal engagement in ACP (aOR: 0.96; 0.93-0.99; P= .009). For respondents with SRLE ≥ 25 years there was no association between SRLE and engagement in ACP.

CONCLUSION

The perception of approaching end of life is associated with higher prevalence of formal engagement in ACP, but only for those with SRLE < 25 years. For clinicians, asking patients after their SRLE might serve as a starting point to explore readiness for ACP.

Association of Advance Care Planning Visits With Intensity of Health Care for Medicare Beneficiaries With Serious Illness at the End of Life

Question

What is the association of a billed advance care planning (ACP) visit with intensive use of health care services at the end of life (EOL) for Medicare beneficiaries with serious illness?

Findings

In this cohort study of claims data of 955 777 Medicare beneficiaries with serious illness who died in 2017 and 2018, billed ACP visits that occurred during the decedents’ EOL course but before the last month of life were relatively uncommon. However, their occurrence was associated with less intensive use of EOL health care services.

Meaning

The findings of this cohort study suggest that ACP is associated with less intensive use of EOL health care services.

Importance

Advance care planning (ACP) is intended to maximize the concordance of preferences with end-of-life (EOL) care and is assumed to lead to less intensive use of health care services. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services began reimbursing clinicians for ACP discussions with patients in 2016.

Objective

To determine whether billed ACP visits are associated with intensive use of health care services at EOL.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective patient-level cohort analysis of seriously ill patients included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who met criteria for serious illness from January 1 to December 31, 2016, and died from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018. Analyses were completed from November 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Five measures of EOL health care services used (inpatient admission, emergency department visit, and/or intensive care unit stay within 30 days of death; in-hospital death; and timing of first hospice bill) and a measure of EOL expenditures. Analyses were adjusted for age, race and ethnicity, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility, and expenditure by hospital referral region (high, medium, or low). The primary exposure was receipt of a billed ACP service classified as none, timely (>1 month before death), or late (first ACP visit ≤1 month before death).

Results

Of the 955 777 Medicare beneficiaries who met criteria for serious illness in 2016 and died in 2017 or 2018, 522 737 (54.7%) were women, 764 666 (80.0%) were 75 years or older, and 822 684 (86.1%) were non-Hispanic White individuals. Among the study population, 81 131 (8.5%) had a timely ACP visit, and an additional 22 804 (2.4%) had a late ACP visit. After multivariable adjustment, compared with patients without any billed ACP visit, patients with a timely ACP visit experienced significantly less intensive EOL care on 4 of 5 measures, including in-hospital death (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.84-0.87), hospital admission (aOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.83-0.85), intensive care unit admission (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.85-0.88), and emergency department visit (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.82-0.84). Only small or insignificant differences in late hospice use or mean total EOL expenditures were noted. Compared with patients without ACP, patients with late ACP experienced more intensive EOL care, including in-hospital death (aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.19-1.26), hospital admission (aOR, 5.28; 95% CI, 5.07-5.50), intensive care unit admission (aOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.53-1.62), and emergency department visit (aOR, 3.87; 95% CI, 3.72-4.02).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of US Medicare beneficiaries, billed ACP services during the EOL course of patients with serious illness were relatively uncommon, but if they occurred before the last month of life, they were associated with less intensive use of EOL services. Further research on the variables affecting hospice use and expenditures in the EOL period and the differential effect of late ACP is recommended to understand the relative role of ACP in achieving goal-concordant care.

Advance Care Planning For Medicare Beneficiaries Increased Substantially, But Prevalence Remained Low

In 2016 fee-for-service Medicare began reimbursing physicians for advance care planning conversations with enrollees during outpatient visits and waived the copayment for advance care planning when it was part of the Medicare annual wellness visit. Advance care planning is intended to help providers treat patients in ways consistent with their wishes and may also reduce unnecessary health care use and spending. Examining fee-for-service Medicare claims, we found a substantial increase in outpatient advance care planning claims between 2016 and 2019, although prevalence remained below 7.5 percent for all patient subgroups analyzed. Roughly half of beneficiaries with advance care planning claims received the service at an annual wellness visit; the remainder received it at a different outpatient visit. Among those with claims, Black, Hispanic, and Medicaid dual-eligible patients and patients with comorbidities were less likely to have a claim at an annual wellness visit, largely because they have fewer such visits overall. Medicare's annual wellness visits offer the potential to expand enrollees' access to advance care planning at no expense to them, in advance of serious illness, and to populations less likely to undertake advance care planning generally.

Advance Care Planning in Older Adults with CKD: Patient, Care Partner, and Clinician Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Older patients with advanced CKD are at high risk for serious complications and death, yet few discuss advance care planning (ACP) with their kidney clinicians. Examining barriers and facilitators to ACP among such patients might help identify patient-centered opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

In semistructured interviews in March through August 2019 with purposively sampled patients (aged ≥70 years, CKD stages 4-5, nondialysis), care partners, and clinicians at clinics in across the United States, participants described discussions, factors contributing to ACP completion or avoidance, and perceived value of ACP. We used thematic analysis to analyze data.

RESULTS

We conducted 68 semistructured interviews with 23 patients, 19 care partners, and 26 clinicians. Only seven of 26 (27%) clinicians routinely discussed ACP. About half of the patients had documented ACP, mostly outside the health care system. We found divergent ACP definitions and perspectives; kidney clinicians largely defined ACP as completion of formal documentation, whereas patients viewed it more holistically, wanting discussions about goals, prognosis, and disease trajectory. Clinicians avoided ACP with patients from minority groups, perceiving cultural or religious barriers. Four themes and subthemes informing variation in decisions to discuss ACP and approaches emerged: (1) role ambiguity and responsibility for ACP, (2) questioning the value of ACP, (3) confronting institutional barriers (time, training, reimbursement, and the electronic medical record, EMR), and (4) consequences of avoiding ACP (disparities in ACP access and overconfidence that patients' wishes are known).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients, care partners, and clinicians hold discordant views about the responsibility for discussing ACP and the scope for it. This presents critical barriers to the process, leaving ACP insufficiently discussed with older adults with advanced CKD.