Form CMS-2728 data versus erythropoietin claims data: implications for quality of care studies

Medicare Advantage Ratings And Voluntary Disenrollment Among Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease

Populations with intensive health care needs and high care costs may be attracted to insurance plans that have high quality ratings, but patients may be likely to disenroll from a plan if their care needs are not met. We assessed the association between publicly reported Medicare Advantage plan star ratings and voluntary disenrollment of incident dialysis patients in the following year over the period 2007-13. We found that Medicare Advantage (MA) plans with lower star ratings had significantly higher rates of disenrollment by incident dialysis patients in the following year. Compared to MA plans with 4.0 or more stars, adjusted disenrollment rates were 3.9 percentage points higher for plans with 3.5 stars, 5.0 percentage points higher for those with 3.0 stars, and 12.1 percentage points higher for those with 2.5 or fewer stars. These findings suggest that low plan quality may lead to increased expenditures, as this high-cost population generally must shift from Medicare Advantage to traditional Medicare upon disenrollment.

ESRD Databases, Public Policy, and Quality of Care: Translational Medicine and Nephrology

Efforts to improve care of patients with ESRD and the policies that guide those activities depend on evidence-based best practices derived from clinical trials and carefully conducted observational studies. Our review describes this process in the context of the translational research model (bench to bedside to populations), with a particular emphasis on bedside care. We illustrate some of its accomplishments and describe the limitations of the data and evidence supporting policy and practice.

A comparison between physicians and computer algorithms for form CMS-2728 data reporting

INTRODUCTION

CMS-2728 form (Medical Evidence Report) assesses 23 comorbidities chosen to reflect poor outcomes and increased mortality risk. Previous studies questioned the validity of physician reporting on forms CMS-2728. We hypothesize that reporting of comorbidities by computer algorithms identifies more comorbidities than physician completion, and, therefore, is more reflective of underlying disease burden.

METHODS

We collected data from CMS-2728 forms for all 296 patients who had incident ESRD diagnosis and received chronic dialysis from 2005 through 2014 at Indiana University outpatient dialysis centers. We analyzed patients' data from electronic medical records systems that collated information from multiple health care sources. Previously utilized algorithms or natural language processing was used to extract data on 10 comorbidities for a period of up to 10 years prior to ESRD incidence. These algorithms incorporate billing codes, prescriptions, and other relevant elements. We compared the presence or unchecked status of these comorbidities on the forms to the presence or absence according to the algorithms.

FINDINGS

Computer algorithms had higher reporting of comorbidities compared to forms completion by physicians. This remained true when decreasing data span to one year and using only a single health center source. The algorithms determination was well accepted by a physician panel. Importantly, algorithms use significantly increased the expected deaths and lowered the standardized mortality ratios.

DISCUSSION

Using computer algorithms showed superior identification of comorbidities for form CMS-2728 and altered standardized mortality ratios. Adapting similar algorithms in available EMR systems may offer more thorough evaluation of comorbidities and improve quality reporting.

Longer-term outcomes of darbepoetin alfa versus epoetin alfa in patients with ESRD initiating hemodialysis: a quasi-experimental cohort study

BACKGROUND

Adequately powered studies directly comparing hard clinical outcomes of darbepoetin alfa (DPO) versus epoetin alfa (EPO) in patients undergoing dialysis are lacking.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational, registry-based, retrospective cohort study; we mimicked a cluster-randomized trial by comparing mortality and cardiovascular events in US patients initiating hemodialysis therapy in facilities (almost) exclusively using DPO versus EPO.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Nonchain US hemodialysis facilities; each facility switching from EPO to DPO (2003-2010) was matched for location, profit status, and facility type with one EPO facility. Patients subsequently initiating hemodialysis therapy in these facilities were assigned their facility-level exposure.

INTERVENTION

DPO versus EPO.

OUTCOMES

All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality; composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), and nonfatal stroke.

MEASUREMENTS

Unadjusted and adjusted HRs from Cox proportional hazards regression models.

RESULTS

Of 508 dialysis facilities that switched to DPO, 492 were matched with a similar EPO facility; 19,932 (DPO: 9,465 [47.5%]; EPO: 10,467 [52.5%]) incident hemodialysis patients were followed up for 21,918 person-years during which 5,550 deaths occurred. Almost all baseline characteristics were tightly balanced. The demographics-adjusted mortality HR for DPO (vs EPO) was 1.06 (95% CI, 1.00-1.13) and was materially unchanged after adjustment for all other baseline characteristics (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.99-1.12). Cardiovascular mortality did not differ between groups (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94-1.16). Nonfatal outcomes were evaluated among 9,455 patients with fee-for-service Medicare: 4,542 (48.0%) in DPO and 4,913 (52.0%) in EPO facilities. During 10,457 and 10,363 person-years, 248 and 372 events were recorded, respectively, for strokes and MIs. We found no differences in adjusted stroke or MI rates or their composite with cardiovascular death (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.96-1.25).

LIMITATIONS

Nonrandom treatment assignment, potential residual confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

In incident hemodialysis patients, mortality and cardiovascular event rates did not differ between patients treated at facilities predominantly using DPO versus EPO.

Agreement of reported vascular access on the medical evidence report and on medicare claims at hemodialysis initiation

BACKGROUND

The choice of vascular access type is an important aspect of care for incident hemodialysis patients. However, data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medical Evidence Report (form CMS-2728) identifying the first access for incident patients have not previously been validated. Medicare began requiring that vascular access type be reported on claims in July 2010. We aimed to determine the agreement between the reported vascular access at initiation from form CMS-2728 and from Medicare claims.

METHODS

This retrospective study used a cohort of 9777 patients who initiated dialysis in the latter half of 2010 and were eligible for Medicare at the start of renal replacement therapy to compare the vascular access type reported on form CMS-2728 with the type reported on Medicare outpatient dialysis claims for the same patients. For each patient, the reported access from each data source was compiled; the percent agreement represented the percent of patients for whom the access was the same. Multivariate logistic analysis was performed to identify characteristics associated with the agreement of reported access.

RESULTS

The two data sources agreed for 94% of patients, with a Kappa statistic of 0.83, indicating an excellent level of agreement. Further, we found no evidence to suggest that agreement was associated with the patient characteristics of age, sex, race, or primary cause of renal failure.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that vascular access data as reported on form CMS-2728 are valid and reliable for use in research studies.