Bundled Payment Programs Research Articles

Number of Stairs at Home is Associated with Discharge to Post-Acute Care Facility Following Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background Discharge to post-acute care facility (PACF) carries significant cost and quality burdens to patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In a recent study of pre-bundled payment model patients, the number of stairs (NOS) at home did not influence discharge to PACF for total hip arthroplasty. However, no study has yet examined NOS as it relates to discharge destination after TKA. In a large metropolitan market, it is not uncommon to have several flights of stairs leading to a home. We hypothesize that the number of unavoidable stairs to enter a home is a significant risk factor for discharge to PACF. Methods We reviewed 557 patients who underwent elective TKA at a single urban academic medical center between November 2011 and October 2014. Demographic data as well as NOS, ASA score, RAPT score, LOS, operative time, and tranexamic acid use were collected. T-tests, ANOVA, and Kruskal-Wallis analysis were conducted followed by a logistic regression to compare associations of factors to discharge to PACF. Results Of the 540 patients included in analysis, 193 (35.7%) were discharged home and 347 (64.3%) were discharged to a PACF. NOS (OR=1.457, p<0.001) and increased age (OR=1.057, p<0.001) were found to be significant risk factors for discharge to PACF while female sex (OR=0.57, p=0.013) and higher RAPT scores (OR=0.83, p=0.004) were protective against discharge to PACF. Conclusion With the conclusion of recent bundled payment programs, financial carrots may disappear, though it is likely that sticks will remain. Therefore, all risk factors must be identified and addressed. We found, in a pre-bundled payments era, that stairs is a risk factor for non-home discharge in a metropolitan population, and we confirmed other known risk factors of older age, higher ASA score, and lower RAPT score.

Perioperative Medicine: What the Future Can Hold for Anesthesiology.

Perioperative Medicine: What the Future Can Hold for Anesthesiology.

Trends in Sepsis and Pneumonia During COVID-19: Lessons From BPCIA

The COVID-19 pandemic affected care delivery nationwide for all patients, influencing cost and utilization for patients both with and without COVID-19. Our first analysis assessed changes in utilization for patients with sepsis without COVID-19 prior to vs during the pandemic. Our second analysis assessed cost and utilization changes during the pandemic for patients with sepsis or pneumonia both with and without COVID-19. A retrospective case-control study was utilized to determine differences in cost and utilization for patients with sepsis or pneumonia, relative to a COVID-19 diagnosis. Claims data from 8 teaching hospitals participating in sepsis and pneumonia episodes in the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCIA) model were utilized. BPCIA is a Medicare value-based care bundled payment program that aims to decrease costs and increase quality of care through a 90-day total cost of care model. The first analysis (N = 1092) found that non-COVID-19 patients with sepsis had 26% higher hospice utilization (P < .05) and 38% higher mortality (P < .0001) during the pandemic vs the prepandemic period. The second analysis (N = 640) found that during the pandemic, patients with sepsis or pneumonia with COVID-19 had 70% more skilled nursing facility (SNF) use (P < .0001), 132% higher SNF costs (P < .0001), and 21% higher total episode costs (P < .0001) compared with patients without COVID-19. COVID-19 has affected care patterns for all patients. Patients without COVID-19 postponed care and used lower-acuity care settings, whereas patients with COVID-19 were more costly and utilized postacute care at a higher rate. These analyses inform future care coordination initiatives, given the ongoing pandemic.

Did Payment Reform Lead to Patient Selection in Hip and Knee Arthroplasties? An Observational Study Using New York State Data.

Background: While the comprehensive care for joint replacement (CJR) bundled payment program for total joint replacement (TJR) emphasizes value, concerns persist regarding unintended consequences, primarily hospital selection of healthier, younger patients. Purpose: We sought to assess changes in patient characteristics and outcomes after CJR implementation in New York State. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included primary total hip and total knee arthroplasties from the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database. Procedures performed before (July 2014 to March 2016; n = 58,610) and after (April 2016 to December 2017; n = 78,728) CJR implementation were compared. Primary outcomes were patient characteristics: Deyo-Comorbidity Index and age. Secondary outcomes were increased hospitalization cost, discharge to institutional post-acute care, and prolonged length of stay. A difference-in-differences analysis estimated changes after CJR implementation, comparing CJR to non-CJR hospitals. Results: We found that CJR implementation (in 49 of 144 New York State hospitals) coincided with slightly older and more comorbid TJR recipients. The CJR program coincided with significantly reduced hospitalization cost and discharge to institutional post-acute care but not length of stay. Some CJR effects appear to have affected non-Medicare patients, as well. Conclusion: This retrospective analysis suggests that in New York State, the CJR bundled payment program did not result in hospitals selecting younger and healthier TJR recipients and coincided with decreased costs and fewer discharges to institutional postacute care.

Risk stratification of patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXTReimbursement has slowly transitioned from a fee-for-service model to a bundled payment model after introduction of the United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services bundled payment program. To minimize healthcare costs, some surgeons are trying to minimize healthcare expenditures by transitioning appropriately selected lumbar decompression patients to outpatient procedure centers. PURPOSETo prepare a risk stratification calculator based on machine learning algorithms to improve surgeon's preoperative predictive capability of determining whether a patient undergoing lumbar decompression will meet inpatient vs. outpatient criteria. Inpatient criteria was defined as any overnight hospital stay. STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGRetrospective single-institution cohort. PATIENT SAMPLEA total of 1656 patients undergoing primary lumbar decompression. OUTCOME MEASURESPostoperative outcomes analyzed for inclusion into the risk calculator included length of stay. METHODSPatients were split 80-20 into a training model and a predictive model. This resulted in 1,325 patients in the training model and 331 into the predictive model. A logistic regression analysis ensured proper variable inclusion into the model. C-statistics were used to understand model effectiveness. An odds ratio and nomogram were created once the optimal model was identified. RESULTSA total of 1,656 patients were included in our cohort with 1,078 dischared on day of surgery and 578 patients spending ≥ 1 midnight in the hospital. Our model determined older patients (OR=1.06, p<.001) with a higher BMI (OR=1.04, p<0.001), higher back pain (OR=1.06, p=.019), increasing American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (OR=1.39, p=.012), and patients with more levels decompressed (OR=3.66, p<0.001) all had increased risks of staying overnight. Patients who were female (OR=0.59, p=.009) and those with private insurance (OR=0.64, p=.023) were less likely to be admitted overnight. Further, weighted scores based on training data were then created and patients with a cumulative score over 118 points had a 82.9% likelihood of overnight. Analysis of the 331 patients in the test data demonstrated using a cut-off of 118 points accurately predicted 64.8% of patients meeting inpatient criteria compared to 23.0% meeting outpatient criteria (p<0.001). Area under the curve analysis showed a score greater than 118 predicted admission 81.4% of the time. The algorithm was incorporated into an open access digital application available here: https://rothmanstatisticscalculators.shinyapps.io/Inpatient_Calculator/?_ga=2.171493472.1789252330.1671633274-469992803.1671633274 CONCLUSIONSUtilizing machine-learning algorithms we created a highly reliable predictive calculator to determine if patients undergoing outpatient lumbar decompression would require admission. Patients who were younger, had lower BMI, lower preoperative back pain, lower ASA score, less levels decompressed, private insurance, lived with someone at home, and with minimal comorbidities were ideal candidates for outpatient surgery.

Succeeding in Medicare’s newest bundled payment program: Results from teaching hospitals

BackgroundIn 2018, Medicare implemented a successor to its Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program, BPCI Advanced, with stricter participation rules and new financial incentives to reduce spending. MethodsUsing claims-based episode data from thirteen participants, we compared spending and utilization in the first fifteen months of the new program (October 2018 to December 2019) to hospital- and episode-specific target prices, with a deep dive into clinical correlates for the most commonly-selected clinical episodes, sepsis and congestive heart failure. ResultsTwelve out of thirteen participants in a collaborative of teaching hospitals achieved shared savings for both Medicare and their own institution. Aggregate hospital shared savings were 5.8% of benchmark prices across 6,131 patients in 16 clinical episodes (p<0.001), appreciably higher than the reference savings rates reported after the first period of Medicare’s predecessor BPCI program. Differences in shared savings across hospitals for sepsis and congestive heart failure correlated with reductions in patients’ use of post-acute care, including reductions in skilled nursing facility, readmission, and home health rates. Evidence is presented showing reductions in patient utilization for cost-intensive post-acute settings accompanied increases in the proportion of patients exclusively utilizing non-institutional care after discharge from an anchor stay or procedure. ConclusionsThese findings provide an example of the fulfillment of a core promise of bundled payments to uncover new opportunities for reduced spending. Level of evidenceNon-random cohort of hospitals.

Preparing for participation in the centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' bundle care payment initiative-advanced for major bowel surgery.

As healthcare costs rise, there is an increasing emphasis on alternative payment models to improve care efficiency. The bundled payment represents an alternative reimbursement model gaining popularity within the surgical sphere. We aimed to assess where the largest opportunities for care improvement lay and how best to identify patients at high risk of suffering costly complications. We utilized itemized CMS claims data for a retrospective cohort of patients between 2014 and 2016 who met inclusion criteria for the Major Bowel Bundled Payment Program and performed a cost analysis to identify opportunities for improved care efficiency. Based on the results of this cost analysis, we identified readmissions as a target for improvement. We then assessed whether the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program surgical risk calculator (ACS NSQIP SRC) could accurately identify patients within our bundled payment population who were at high risk of readmission using a logistic regression model. Our study cohort included 252 patients. Readmissions accounted for 12.8% of the average total care episode cost with a coefficient of variation of 2.72, thereby representing the most substantial, non-fixed cost for our bundled payment patients. Patients readmitted within their 90-day care episode were 2.53 times more likely to be high-cost (>$60,000) than patients not readmitted. However, the ACS NSQIP SRC did not accurately predict patients at high risk of readmission within the first 30 days with an AUROC of 0.58. Our study highlights the importance of reducing readmissions as a central component of improving care for bowel surgery bundled payment patients. Preventing such readmissions requires accurate identification of patients at high risk of readmission; however, current risk prediction models lack the adaptability necessary for this task.

Organizational Capacity Among Hospitals in Medicare and Commercial Bundled Payments

Hospitals must strategically build organizational capacities to succeed in bundled payment arrangements. Given differences between Medicare and commercial arrangements, capacities may vary between hospitals in Medicare vs both Medicare and commercial bundled payment programs. This study compared organizational capacities between these 2 hospital groups. National survey of American Hospital Association (AHA) member hospitals with experience in bundled payment programs. We analyzed data from October 31, 2017, to April 30, 2018, collected from AHA member hospitals with bundled payment experience in only Medicare (Medicare-only hospitals) or in both Medicare and commercial insurers (multipayer hospitals). Survey questions examined capacity in 4 areas: (1) physician performance feedback, (2) care management, (3) postacute care provider utilization, and (4) health information technology. Our sample included 114 hospitals reporting experience in Medicare or commercial bundled payment programs. Both Medicare-only and multipayer hospitals reported high organizational capacities in performance measurement of physician-level quality and cost feedback and in incorporation of health information technology. More multipayer hospitals reported high capacity for coordinating hospital to postacute care settings (88% vs 52%). Although nearly all hospitals in both groups reported formalized relationships with skilled nursing facilities (98%), fewer hospitals reported such relationships with long-term acute care hospitals (83%) and inpatient rehabilitation facilities (80%). Although they have similar capacity in a number of areas, Medicare-only and multipayer hospitals differed with respect to other aspects of organizational capacity.

Development of a Novel Prospective Model to Predict Unplanned 90-Day Readmissions After Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundFor hospitals participating in bundled payment programs, unplanned readmissions after surgery are often termed “bundle busters.” The aim of this study was to develop the framework for a prospective model to predict 90-day unplanned readmissions after elective primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) at a macroscopic hospital-based level. MethodsA national, all-payer, inpatient claims and cost accounting database was used. A mixed-effect logistic regression model measuring the association of unplanned 90-day readmissions with a number of patient-level and hospital-level characteristics was constructed. ResultsUsing 427,809 unique inpatient THA encounters, 77 significant risk factors across 5 domains (ie, comorbidities, demographics, surgical history, active medications, and intraoperative factors) were identified. The highest frequency domain was comorbidities (64/100) with malignancies (odds ratio [OR] 2.26), disorders of the respiratory system (OR 1.75), epilepsy (OR 1.5), and psychotic disorders (OR 1.5), being the most predictive. Other notable risk factors identified by the model were the use of opioid analgesics (OR 7.3), Medicaid coverage (OR 1.8), antidepressants (OR 1.6), and blood-related medications (OR 1.6). The model produced an area under the curve of 0.715. ConclusionWe developed a novel model to predict unplanned 90-day readmissions after elective primary THA. Fifteen percent of the risk factors are potentially modifiable such as use of tranexamic acid, spinal anesthesia, and opioid medications. Given the complexity of the factors involved, hospital systems with vested interest should consider incorporating some of the findings from this study in the form of electronic medical records predictive analytics tools to offer clinicians with real-time actionable data.

Quality and costs in health care: using target costing in support of bundled payment programs

PurposeThe main purpose of this study is to provide healthcare institutions with a management accounting framework that helps them achieve their quality goals and cost targets when providing services under bundled payment schemes.Design/methodology/approachAfter providing a theoretical framework on both bundled payments and target costing, the success factors of the former are compared with the principles of the latter in order to analyze the compatibility and complementarity of these models. Afterwards, an example of their potential combination in practice is introduced and ideas for future research are suggested.FindingsIt is concluded that, apart from presenting similar underlying goals as regards quality and cost, bundled payments and target costing display elements in common that make them compatible from a theoretical standpoint.Originality/valueBecause bundled payments models are relatively new, studies on their compatibility with managerial techniques emerging from industries other than healthcare do not abound in the literature.

The Proportion of Marginalized Individuals in US Communities and Hospital Participation in Bundled Payments.

Hospitals have demonstrated the benefits of both voluntary and mandatory bundled payments for joint replacement surgery. However, given generalizability and disparities concerns, it is critical to understand the availability of care through bundled payments to historically marginalized groups, such as racial and ethnic minorities and individuals with lower socioeconomic status (SES). This cross-sectional analysis of 3880 US communities evaluated the relationship between the proportion of Black and Hispanic individuals (minority share) or Medicare/Medicaid dual-eligible individuals (low SES share) and community-level participation in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative (BPCI) (being a BPCI community) and Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model (being a CJR community). An increase from the lowest to highest quartile of minority share was not associated with differences in the probability of being a BPCI community (3.5 percentage point [pp] difference, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.2% to 8.3%, P = 0.15), but was associated with a 16.1 pp higher probability of being a CJR community (95% CI 10.3% to 22.0%, P < 0.0001). An increase from the lowest to highest quartile of low SES share was associated with a 6.0 pp lower probability of being a BPCI community (95% CI -10.9% to -1.2%, P = 0.02) and 19.0 pp lower probability of being a CJR community (95% CI -24.9% to -13.0%, P < 0.0001). These findings highlight that the greater the proportion of lower SES individuals in a community, the lower the likelihood that its hospitals participated in either voluntary or mandatory bundled payments. Policymakers should consider community socioeconomic characteristics when designing participation mechanisms for future bundled payment programs.

Medicare’s Bundled Payment Models—Progress and Pitfalls

In this Viewpoint, Joynt Maddox and colleagues consider how the bundled payment programs from the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services require close examination of benchmarks, market distortions, and health equity.

Participation in Value-Based Payment Programs and U.S. Acute Care Hospital Population Health Partnerships.

The goal of this study was to describe the prevalence and pattern of population health partnerships by hospitals and examine whether these partnerships were associated with different types of payment model programs. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 3,012 U.S. hospitals using data from the American Hospital Association's Annual Survey, the Area Health Resources File, and the County Health Rankings & Roadmaps data. We ran a multivariable Poisson regression model to examine the relationship between value-based payment designs and the number of population health partnerships. Binary logistic regression models were used to assess whether participation in value-based payment design programs was associated with specific types of population health partnerships. We found that two thirds or more of hospitals used more informal collaborative partnerships with local or state government, faith-based organizations, and local businesses; formal alliances were most common with health insurance companies and other healthcare providers. Accountable care organizations and bundled payment program participation were associated with greater numbers of population health partnerships, whereas hospital ownership of a health plan was not associated with significantly greater numbers of population health partnerships. Hospitals were engaged in an intermediate number of partnerships (mean = 3.5, out of 8.0 possible), with opportunities for more partnerships with specific types of organizations (faith-based organizations, health insurance companies). Our findings also suggest that certain types of payment models, particularly those that are less capital intensive and entail less extensive organizational transformation on the part of hospitals, may support hospital engagement in population health partnerships. Hospital leaders need to monitor these partnerships continually to determine if they can capitalize on opportunities to play a more prominent role in population health management in local communities.

Life After BPCI: High Quality Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty Care Can Still Exist Outside of a Bundled Payment Program

BackgroundConcerns regarding target price methodology and financial penalties have led to withdrawal from Medicare bundled payment programs for total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA), despite its early successful results. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was any difference in patient comorbidities and outcomes following our institution’s exit from the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement - Advanced (BPCI-A). MethodsWe reviewed consecutive 2,737 primary TKA and 2,009 primary THA patients following our withdraw from BPCI-A January 1, 2020-March 30, 2021 and compared them to 1,203 TKA and 1,088 THA patients from October 1, 2018-August 2, 2019 enrolled in BPCI-A. We compared patient demographics, comorbidities, discharge disposition, complications, and 90-day readmissions.Multivariate analysis was performed to identify if bundle participation was associated with complications or readmissions. ResultsPost-bundle TKA had shorter length of stay (1.4 vs 1.8 days, P < .001). Both TKA and THA patients were significantly less likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility (5.6% vs 19.2%, P < .001 and 6.0% vs 10.0%, P < .001, respectively). Controlling for confounders, post-bundle TKA had lower complications (OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.45-0.98, P = .037) but no difference in 90-day readmission (OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.55-1.16, P = .224). ConclusionsSince leaving BPCI-A, we have maintained high quality THA care and improved TKA care with reduced complications and length of stay under a fee-for-service model. Furthermore, we have lowered rehabilitation discharge for both TKA and THA patients. CMS should consider partnering with high performing institutions to develop new models for risk sharing.

Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Alternative Payment Model Successes and Challenges.

Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Alternative Payment Model Successes and Challenges.

How the Shift in Arthroplasty Surgery Location Impacts the Relationship of Private Surgeons, Hospitals, and Ambulatory Surgery Centers

The recent removal of total hip and knee arthroplasty from the Medicare inpatient-only list, COVID-19 pandemic, decreasing reimbursements, and bundled payment programs have all had tremendous impact on the practice of arthroplasty. Surgeons and practices must adapt to these challenges to achieve the ideal triad of quality patient care, low cost to payors, and sustainable financial margins for stakeholders. Here, we review institutional data and present our experience with the changing arthroplasty practice landscape. With the principle of demand matching, arthroplasty surgeons and practices can risk-stratify and shuttle patients in the appropriate operative and rehabilitation setting to optimize quality and efficiency.

The Spillover Effect of the Medicare Mandatory Bundled Payment Program on Joint Replacement Outcomes: Analysis of Patients with Commercial Insurance and Medicare Advantage.

To improve the value and efficiency of care among traditional Medicare enrollees, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has implemented alternative payment models designed to control health-care spending and improve quality. These models may affect care beyond traditional Medicare enrollees, "spilling over" into other populations. Established in April 2016, the Medicare mandatory bundled payment program, called the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model, holds hospitals accountable for spending and quality of care for traditional Medicare joint-replacement patients during care episodes that span from the index hospitalization to 90 days post-discharge. We assessed the extent to which the CJR model was associated with outcomes for patients enrolled in commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage plans. With use of Health Care Cost Institute claims data from 2012 through 2017, we assessed the association of the CJR model with total expenditures, discharges to institutional post-acute care, and readmissions among commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage joint-replacement patients. The exposure variable was the implementation of the CJR model in 67 randomly selected metropolitan statistical areas compared with 103 similar areas without CJR implementation. We utilized difference-in-differences models to estimate the spillover effects of the CJR model by comparing outcomes between these areas before and after CJR implementation. The study included 174,893 joint-replacement episodes of care in commercial insurance enrollees and 202,070 episodes in Medicare Advantage enrollees. Among both commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage enrollees, CJR implementation was associated with no meaningful changes in total episode expenditures, discharges to institutional post-acute care, or readmissions. We found no evidence for spillover effects of the CJR model on commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage patients, suggesting that alternative payment models targeting traditional Medicare patients may have limited effects on the cost and quality of care for patients outside of the traditional Medicare system.

Skilled Nursing Facility Participation in a Voluntary Medicare Bundled Payment Program: Association With Facility Financial Performance.

Model 3 of the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) is an alternative payment model in which an entity takes accountability for the episode costs. It is unclear how BPCI affected the overall skilled nursing facility (SNF) financial performance and the differences between facilities with differing racial/ethnic and socioeconomic status (SES) composition of the residents. The objective of this study was to determine associations between BPCI participation and SNF finances and across-facility differences in SNF financial performance. A longitudinal study spanning 2010-2017, based on difference-in-differences analyses for 575 persistent-participation SNFs, 496 dropout SNFs, and 13,630 eligible nonparticipating SNFs. Inflation-adjusted operating expenses, revenues, profit, and profit margin. BPCI was associated with reductions of $0.63 million in operating expenses and $0.57 million in operating revenues for the persistent-participation group but had no impact on the dropout group compared with nonparticipating SNFs. Among persistent-participation SNFs, the BPCI-related declines were $0.74 million in operating expenses and $0.52 million in operating revenues for majority-serving SNFs; and $1.33 and $0.82 million in operating expenses and revenues, respectively, for non-Medicaid-dependent SNFs. The between-facility SES gaps in operating expenses were reduced (differential difference-in-differences estimate=$1.09 million). Among dropout SNFs, BPCI showed mixed effects on across-facility SES and racial/ethnic differences in operating expenses and revenues. The BPCI program showed no effect on operating profit measures. BPCI led to reduced operating expenses and revenues for SNFs that participated and remained in the program but had no effect on operating profit indicators and mixed effects on SES and racial/ethnic differences across SNFs.

The Effect of Hospital Safety Net Status on the Association Between Bundled Payment Participation and Changes in Medical Episode Outcomes.

Under Medicare's Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program, hospitals have maintained quality and achieved savings for medical conditions. However, safety net hospitals may perform differently owing to financial constraints and organizational challenges. To evaluate whether hospital safety net status affected the association between bundled payment participation and medical episode outcomes. This observational difference-in-differences analysis was conducted in safety net and non-safety net hospitals participating in BPCI for medical episodes (BPCI hospitals) using data from 2011-2016 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, congestive heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Hospital BPCI participation and safety net status. The primary outcome was postdischarge spending. Secondary outcomes included quality and post-acute care utilization measures. Our sample consisted of 803 safety net and 2263 non-safety net hospitals. Safety net hospitals were larger and located in areas with more low-income individuals than non-safety net hospitals. Among BPCI hospitals, safety net status was not associated with differential postdischarge spending (adjusted difference-in-differences [aDID], $40; 95% CI, -$254 to $335; P = .79) or quality (mortality, readmissions). However, BPCI safety net hospitals had differentially greater discharge to institutional post-acute care (aDID, 1.06 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.37-1.76; P = .003) and lower discharge home with home health (aDID, -1.15 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.73 to -0.58; P < .001) than BPCI non-safety net hospitals. Under medical condition bundles, safety net hospitals perform differently from other hospitals in terms of post-acute care utilization, but not spending. Policymakers could support safety net hospitals and consider safety net status when evaluating bundled payment programs.

National Trends in Post-Acute Care Costs Following Total Hip Arthroplasty from 2010 through 2018.

Post-acute care remains a target for episode-of-care cost reduction following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The introduction of bundled payment models in the United States in 2013 aligned incentives among providers to reduce post-acute care resource utilization. Institution-level studies have shown increased rates of home discharge with substantial cost savings after adoption of bundled payment models; however, national data have yet to be reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate national trends in post-acute care utilization and costs following primary THA over the last decade. We reviewed the cases of 189,847 patients undergoing primary THA during 2010 through 2018 from the PearlDiver database. Annual trends in patient demographics, discharge disposition, and post-acute care resource utilization were evaluated. Post-acute care reimbursements were standardized to 2020 dollars and included outpatient visits, prescriptions, physical therapy, home health, inpatient rehabilitation, skilled nursing facilities, and any rehospitalizations or emergency department (ED) visits within 90 days of surgery. From 2010 to 2018, the mean episode-of-care costs ($31,562 versus $24,188; p < 0.001) and overall post-acute care costs ($5,903 versus $3,485; p < 0.001) both declined. Post-acute care savings were primarily driven by reduced costs of skilled nursing facilities ($1,533 versus $627; p < 0.001), home health ($1,041 versus $763; p = 0.002), inpatient rehabilitation ($949 versus $552; p < 0.001), ED visits ($508 versus $102; p < 0.001), and rehospitalizations ($367 versus $179; p < 0.001). Post-acute care costs declined by $578 (p = 0.025) during 2010 to 2012, $768 (p = 0.038) during 2013 to 2015, and $884 (p = 0.020) during 2016 to 2018. Over the last decade, the rate of home discharge after THA increased while rehospitalization and ED visit rates declined, resulting in a substantial decrease in total and post-acute care costs. Post-acute care costs declined most rapidly after the introduction of the new Medicare bundled payment programs in 2013 and 2016.