Public reporting and market area exit decisions by home health agencies

Potentially More Out of Reach: Public Reporting Exacerbates Inequities in Home Health Access

Policy Points Public reporting is associated with both mitigating and exacerbating inequities in high-quality home health agency use for marginalized groups. Ensuring equitable access to home health requires taking a closer look at potentially inequitable policies to ensure that these policies are not inadvertently exacerbating disparities as home health public reporting potentially does. Targeted federal, state, and local interventions should focus on raising awareness about the five-star quality ratings among marginalized populations for whom inequities have been exacerbated.

CONTEXT

Literature suggests that public reporting of quality may have the unintended consequence of exacerbating disparities in access to high-quality, long-term care for older adults. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of the home health five-star ratings on changes in high-quality home health agency use by race, ethnicity, income status, and place-based factors.

METHODS

We use data from the Outcome and Assessment Information Set, Medicare Enrollment Files, Care Compare, and American Community Survey to estimate differential access to high-quality home health agencies between July 2014 and June 2017. To estimate the impact of the home health five-star rating introduction on the use of high-quality home health agencies, we use a longitudinal observational pretest-posttest design.

FINDINGS

After the introduction of the home health five-star ratings in 2016, we found that adjusted rates of high-quality home health agency use increased for all home health patients, except for Hispanic/Latine and Asian American/Pacific Islander patients. Additionally, we found that the disparity in high-quality home health agency use between low-income and higher-income home health patients was exacerbated after the introduction of the five-star quality ratings. We also observed that patients within predominantly Hispanic/Latine neighborhoods had a significant decrease in their use of high-quality home health agencies, whereas patients in predominantly White and integrated neighborhoods had a significant increase in high-quality home health agency use. Other neighborhoods experience a nonsignificant change in high-quality home health agency use.

CONCLUSIONS

Policymakers should be aware of the potential unintended consequences for implementing home health public reporting, specifically for Hispanic/Latine, Asian American/Pacific Islander, and low-income home health patients, as well as patients residing in predominantly Hispanic/Latine neighborhoods. Targeted interventions should focus on raising awareness around the five-star ratings.

Evidence for Action: Addressing Systemic Racism Across Long-Term Services and Supports

Long-term services and supports (LTSS), including care received at home and in residential settings such as nursing homes, are highly racially segregated; Black, Indigenous, and persons of color (BIPOC) users have less access to quality care and report poorer quality of life compared to their White counterparts. Systemic racism lies at the root of these disparities, manifesting via racially segregated care, low Medicaid reimbursement, and lack of livable wages for staff, along with other policies and processes that exacerbate disparities. We reviewed Medicaid reimbursement, pay-for-performance, public reporting of quality of care, and culture change in nursing homes and integrated home- and community-based service (HCBS) programs as possible mechanisms for addressing racial and ethnic disparities. We developed a set of recommendations for LTSS based on existing evidence, including (1) increase Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement rates, especially for providers serving high proportions of Medicaid-eligible and BIPOC older adults; (2) reconsider the design of pay-for-performance programs as they relate to providers who serve underserved groups; (3) include culturally sensitive measures, such as quality of life, in public reporting of quality of care, and develop and report health equity measures in outcomes of care for BIPOC individuals; (4) implement culture change so services are more person-centered and homelike, alongside improvements in staff wages and benefits in high-proportion BIPOC nursing homes; (5) expand access to Medicaid-waivered HCBS services; (6) adopt culturally appropriate HCBS practices, with special attention to family caregivers; (7) and increase promotion of integrated HCBS programs that can be targeted to BIPOC consumers, and implement models that value community health workers. Multipronged solutions may help diminish the role of systemic racism in existing racial disparities in LTSS, and these recommendations provide steps for action that are needed to reimagine how long-term care is delivered, especially for BIPOC populations.

Out Of Reach: Inequities In The Use Of High-Quality Home Health Agencies

Patients receiving home health services from high-quality home health agencies often experience fewer adverse outcomes (for example, hospitalizations) than patients receiving services from low-quality agencies. Using administrative data from 2016 and regression analysis, we examined individual- and neighborhood-level racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic factors associated with the use of high-quality home health agencies. We found that Black and Hispanic home health patients had a 2.2-percentage-point and a 2.5-percentage-point lower adjusted probability of high-quality agency use, respectively, compared with their White counterparts within the same neighborhoods. Low-income patients had a 1.2-percentage-point lower adjusted probability of high-quality agency use compared with their higher-income counterparts, whereas home health patients residing in neighborhoods with higher proportions of marginalized residents had a lower adjusted probability of high-quality agency use. Some 40-77 percent of the disparities in high-quality agency use were attributable to neighborhood-level factors. Ameliorating these inequities will require policies that dismantle structural and institutional barriers related to residential segregation.

Malpractice Environment vs Direct Litigation: What Drives Nursing Home Exit?

An ongoing concern about medical malpractice litigation is that it may induce provider exit, potentially affecting consumer welfare. The nursing home sector is subject to substantial litigation activity but remains generally understudied in terms of the effects of litigation, due perhaps to a paucity of readily available data. In this article, we estimate the association between litigation and nursing home exit (closure or change in ownership), separating the impact of malpractice environment from direct litigation. We use 2 main data sources for this study: Westlaw's Adverse Filings database (1997-2005) and Online Survey, Certification and Reporting data sets (1997-2005). We use probit models with state and year fixed effects to examine the relationship between litigation and the probability of nursing home closure or change in ownership with and without adjustment for malpractice environment. We examine the relationship on average and also stratify by profit status, chain membership, and market competition. We find that direct litigation against a nursing home has a nonsignificant effect on the probability of closure or change in ownership within the subsequent 2 years. In contrast, the broader malpractice environment has a significant effect on change in ownership, even for nursing homes that have not been sued, but not on closure. Effects are stronger among for-profit and chain facilities and those in more competitive markets. A high-risk malpractice environment is associated with change of ownership of nursing homes regardless of whether they have been directly sued, indicating that it is too blunt an instrument for weeding out low-quality nursing homes.

The Effect of Publicized Quality Information on Home Health Agency Choice

We examine consumers' use of publicized quality information in Medicare home health care markets, where consumer cost sharing and travel costs are absent. We report two findings. First, agencies with high quality scores are more likely to be preferred by consumers after the introduction of a public reporting program than before. Second, consumers' use of publicized quality information differs by patient group. Community-based patients have slightly larger responses to public reporting than hospital-discharged patients. Patients with functional limitations at the start of their care, at least among hospital-discharged patients, have a larger response to the reported functional outcome measure than those without functional limitations. In all cases of significant marginal effects, magnitudes are small. We conclude that the current public reporting approach is unlikely to have critical impacts on home health agency choice. Identifying and releasing quality information that is meaningful to consumers may help increase consumers' use of public reports.