Objective:To determine the incidence, cost, and payment for intensive care unit services among Medicare beneficiaries. Design:Retrospective observational database cohort study. Setting:All nonfederal hospitals with intensive care unit beds (n = 5003) paid through the inpatient prospective payment system (IPPS). Patients:We used all fiscal year 2000 Medicare IPPS hospitalizations with consistent payment information (n = 10,657,587). Interventions:None. Measurements and Main Results:We examined the distribution of cost and payments overall, by hospital type, and by diagnosis related group. Intensive care was used in 2,353,208 cases (21.1%). The overall incidence was 59.8 cases per thousand beneficiaries in the aged (65+) population, increasing with age from 36.2 (65–69) to 91.6 (85+). Intensive care unit patients cost nearly three times floor patients ($14,135 vs. $5,571), with two thirds of costs associated with the intensive care unit portion of the stay, $2,278 per intensive care unit day. However, intensive care unit cases were paid at a rate only twice floor cases ($11,704 vs. $5,835). Only 83% of costs were paid for intensive care unit patients, compared with 105% for floor patients, generating a $5.8 billion loss to hospitals when intensive care unit care is required. There was a linear association between the percent intensive care unit in a diagnosis related group and the percent paid, with payment >90% of cost only in diagnosis related groups with ≥60% intensive care unit cases. We found that teaching hospitals were better paid than nonteaching hospitals (87% vs. 78% of costs, respectively), but this was only due to indirect medical education payments. Conclusions:Intensive care is common, expensive, and poorly paid in the Medicare population. Few diagnosis related groups have a large enough intensive care unit population to ensure adequate payment. Additional diagnosis related groups for conditions common to the intensive care unit would improve payment and enable incentives for efficiency.
[1]
L. Greenfield,et al.
Paying a premium: how patient complexity affects costs and profit margins.
,
1999,
Annals of surgery.
[2]
C J Coulton,et al.
Implications of DRG Payments for Medical Intensive Care
,
1985,
Medical care.
[3]
I. L. Cohen,et al.
Clinical and economic outcome of mechanically ventilated patients in New York State during 1993: analysis of 10,473 cases under DRG 475.
,
1998,
Chest.
[4]
Hhs Centers for Medicare Medicare Services.
Medicare program; changes to the hospital inpatient prospective payment systems and fiscal year 2006 rates. Final rule.
,
2005,
Federal register.
[5]
H. Saranchak,et al.
Outcome and cost of prolonged stay in the surgical intensive care unit.
,
1984,
Archives of surgery.
[6]
E. Sivak,et al.
Impact of diagnosis-related groups' prospective payment on utilization of medical intensive care.
,
1988,
Chest.
[7]
S. Surgenor,et al.
The cost of providing intensive care to Diagnosis Related Groups
,
2001
.
[8]
C. Bekes,et al.
Reimbursement for intensive care services under diagnosis-related groups.
,
1988,
Critical care medicine.
[9]
D C Angus,et al.
Caring for the critically ill patient. Current and projected workforce requirements for care of the critically ill and patients with pulmonary disease: can we meet the requirements of an aging population?
,
2000,
JAMA.
[10]
M. Chatfield.
Technology in Hospitals: Medical Advances and Their Diffusion
,
1979
.
[11]
D. Gracey.
The problem with diagnosis related group 475.
,
2002,
Chest.
[12]
L. Wise,et al.
Diagnosis-related groups, costs, and outcome for patients in the intensive care unit.
,
1989,
Heart & lung : the journal of critical care.