Assessment of the Effect of Adjustment for Patient Characteristics on Hospital Readmission Rates: Implications for Pay for Performance

Importance In several pay-for-performance programs, Medicare ties payments to readmission rates but accounts only for a limited set of patient characteristics—and no measures of social risk—when assessing performance of health care providers (clinicians, practices, hospitals, or other organizations). Debate continues over whether accounting for social risk would mitigate inappropriate penalties or would establish lower standards of care for disadvantaged patients if they are served by lower-quality providers. Objectives To assess changes in hospital performance on readmission rates after adjusting for additional clinical and social patient characteristics by using methods that distinguish the association between patient characteristics and readmission from between-hospital differences in quality. Design, Setting, and Participants Using Medicare claims for admissions in 2013 through 2014 and linked US Census data, we assessed several clinical and social characteristics of patients that are not currently used for risk adjustment in the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program. We compared hospital readmission rates with and without adjustment for these additional characteristics, using only the average within-hospital associations between patient characteristics and readmission as the basis for adjustment, thereby appropriately excluding hospitals’ distinct contributions to readmission from the adjustment. Main Outcomes and Measures All-cause readmission within 30 days of discharge. Results The study sample consisted of 1 169 014 index admissions among 1 003 664 unique Medicare beneficiaries (41.5% men; mean [SD] age, 79.9 [8.3] years) in 2215 hospitals. Compared with adjustment for patient characteristics currently implemented by Medicare, adjustment for the additional characteristics reduced overall variation in hospital readmission rates by 9.6%, changed rates upward or downward by 0.37 to 0.72 percentage points for the 10% of hospitals most affected by the additional adjustments (±30.3% to ±58.9% of the hospital-level standard deviation), and would be expected to reduce penalties (in relative terms) by 52%, 46%, and 41% for hospitals with the largest 1%, 5%, and 10% of penalty reductions, respectively. The additional adjustments reduced the mean difference in readmission rates between hospitals in the top and bottom quintiles of high-risk patients by 0.53 percentage points (95% CI, 0.50-0.55; P < .001), or 54% of the difference estimated with CMS adjustments alone. Both clinical and social characteristics contributed to these reductions, and these reductions were considerably greater for conditions targeted by the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program. Adjustment for social characteristics resulted in greater changes in rates of readmission or death than in rates of readmission alone. Conclusions and Relevance Hospitals serving higher-risk patients may be penalized substantially because of the patients they serve rather than their quality of care. Adjusting solely for within-hospital associations may allow adjustment for additional patient characteristics to mitigate unintended consequences of pay for performance without holding hospitals to different standards because of the patients they serve.

[1]  K. J. Maddox Financial Incentives and Vulnerable Populations — Will Alternative Payment Models Help or Hurt? , 2018 .

[2]  A. Jha,et al.  Face the Facts: We Need to Change the Way We Do Pay for Performance , 2017, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[3]  A. Zaslavsky,et al.  The Value-Based Payment Modifier: Program Outcomes and Implications for Disparities , 2017, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[4]  Rachael B. Zuckerman,et al.  Effect of a Hospital‐wide Measure on the Readmissions Reduction Program , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  Yu Cao,et al.  Most Hospitals Received Annual Penalties For Excess Readmissions, But Some Fared Better Than Others. , 2017, Health affairs.

[6]  J. McWilliams MACRA: Big Fix or Big Problem? , 2017, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[7]  P. Conway,et al.  Should Medicare Value-Based Purchasing Take Social Risk into Account? , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  Melinda Beeuwkes Buntin,et al.  Social Risk Factors and Equity in Medicare Payment. , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  A. Ryan,et al.  Pay-for-Performance , 2017, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[10]  K. Joynt,et al.  Examining Race and Ethnicity Information in Medicare Administrative Data. , 2017, Medical care.

[11]  K. Joynt,et al.  Examining Measures of Income and Poverty in Medicare Administrative Data. , 2017, Medical care.

[12]  C. Steiner,et al.  Impact of Race/Ethnicity and Socioeconomic Status on Risk-Adjusted Hospital Readmission Rates Following Hip and Knee Arthroplasty. , 2016, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[13]  S. Normand,et al.  Accounting For Patients' Socioeconomic Status Does Not Change Hospital Readmission Rates. , 2016, Health affairs.

[14]  Laura A. Hatfield,et al.  Early Performance of Accountable Care Organizations in Medicare. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  T. Osler,et al.  Impact of Risk Adjustment for Socioeconomic Status on Risk-adjusted Surgical Readmission Rates , 2016, Annals of surgery.

[16]  L. McMahon,et al.  The Impact of Disability and Social Determinants of Health on Condition-Specific Readmissions beyond Medicare Risk Adjustments: A Cohort Study , 2016, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[17]  Michael Lawrence Barnett,et al.  Patient Characteristics and Differences in Hospital Readmission Rates. , 2015, JAMA internal medicine.

[18]  A. Milstein,et al.  The Financial Effect of Value-Based Purchasing and the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program on Safety-Net Hospitals in 2014 , 2015, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[19]  A. Ryan,et al.  Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program in Surgery May Disproportionately Affect Minority-serving Hospitals. , 2015, Annals of surgery.

[20]  Maulik S Joshi,et al.  Community factors and hospital readmission rates. , 2015, Health services research.

[21]  Menggang Yu,et al.  Neighborhood Socioeconomic Disadvantage and 30-Day Rehospitalization , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[22]  H. Krumholz,et al.  Considering the Role of Socioeconomic Status in Hospital Outcomes Measures , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[23]  W. Dunagan,et al.  The Risks of Not Adjusting Performance Measures for Sociodemographic Factors , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[24]  A. Zaslavsky,et al.  Quality reporting that addresses disparities in health care. , 2014, JAMA.

[25]  L. Koenig,et al.  The Medicare Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program: potential unintended consequences for hospitals serving vulnerable populations. , 2014, Health services research.

[26]  A. Ryan Will value-based purchasing increase disparities in care? , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[27]  A. Jha,et al.  A path forward on Medicare readmissions. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  Ashish K. Jha,et al.  Characteristics of hospitals receiving penalties under the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program. , 2013, JAMA.

[29]  Ethan A. Halm,et al.  Impact of Social Factors on Risk of Readmission or Mortality in Pneumonia and Heart Failure: Systematic Review , 2013, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[30]  B. Stuart,et al.  Eligibility and Take-up of the Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy , 2012, Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing.

[31]  E John Orav,et al.  Thirty-day readmission rates for Medicare beneficiaries by race and site of care. , 2011, JAMA.

[32]  K. Saag,et al.  Identifying types of nursing facility stays using medicare claims data: an algorithm and validation , 2010, Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology.