Medicare Services Research Articles

Using artificial intelligence to improve administrative process in Medicaid.

Administrative burden across state-federal benefits programs is unsustainable, and artificial intelligence (AI) and associated technologies have emerged and resulted in significant interest as possible solutions. While early in development, AI has significant potential to reduce administrative waste and increase efficiency, with many government agencies and state legislators eager to adopt the new technology. Turning to existing frameworks defining what functions are considered "inherently governmental" can help determine where more autonomous implementation could be not only appropriate but also provide unique advantages. Such areas could include eligibility and redetermination of Medicaid eligibility as well as preventing improper Medicaid payments. However, while AI is promising, this technology may not be ready for fully autonomous implementation and instead could be deployed to augment human capabilities with robust safeguards until it has proven to be more reliable. In the meantime, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services should release clear guidance around the use of AI by state Medicaid programs, and policymakers must work together to harness AI technologies in order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Medicaid program.

Strengthening Quality Measurement to Predict Success for Total Knee Arthroplasty: Results from a Nationally Representative Total Knee Arthroplasty Cohort.

When performed well on appropriate patients, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can dramatically improve quality of life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to measure outcome following TKA. Accurate prediction of improvement in PROMs after TKA potentially plays an important role in judging the surgical quality of the health-care institutions as well as informing preoperative shared decision-making. Starting in 2027, the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) will begin mandating PROM reporting to assess the quality of TKAs. Using data from a national cohort of patients undergoing primary unilateral TKA, we developed an original model that closely followed a CMS-proposed measure to predict success, defined as achieving substantial clinical benefit, specifically at least a 20-point improvement on the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Arthroplasty (KOOS, JR) at 1 year, and an enhanced model with just 1 additional predictor: the baseline KOOS, JR. We evaluated each model's performance using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) and the ratio of observed to expected (model-predicted) outcomes (O:E ratio). We studied 5,958 patients with a mean age of 67 years; 63% were women, 93% were White, and 87% were overweight or obese. Adding the baseline KOOS, JR improved the AUC from 0.58 to 0.73. Ninety-four percent of those in the top decile of predicted probability of success under the enhanced model achieved success, compared with 34% in its bottom decile. Analogous numbers for the original model were less discriminating: 77% compared with 57%. Only the enhanced model predicted success accurately across the spectrum of baseline scores. The findings were virtually identical when we replicated these analyses on only patients ≥65 years of age. Adding a baseline knee-specific PROM score to a quality measurement model in a nationally representative cohort dramatically improved its predictive power, eliminating ceiling and floor effects and mispredictions for readily identifiable patient subgroups. The enhanced model neither favors nor discourages care for those with greater knee dysfunction and requires no new data collection. Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Implementation of the New Medicare-Mandated Patient-Reported Outcomes After Joint Arthroplasty Performance Measure

A new mandatory hospital-level, risk-standardized performance measure for elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) based on patient-reported outcomes (THA/TKA PRO-PM) has been implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). All THA and TKA in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries at inpatient facilities are included. The THA/TKA PRO-PM is the proportion of risk-standardized THA or TKA patients meeting or exceeding the substantial clinical benefit threshold between preoperative and postoperative outcomes measures (Hip dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement). This binary outcome (yes/no) is then divided by all eligible patients creating a percentage of patients reaching substantial clinical benefit. The percentile score among hospitals will be reported. Following 2 voluntary reporting periods, mandatory reporting will begin in 2025. The CMS requires 50% reporting rates; failure leads to annual payment reduction in fiscal year 2028. The CMS intends the THA/TKA PRO-PM to be a patient-centered, meaningful, and relatable measure of hospital performance reported to the public. For surgeons, this is an opportunity to collaborate with hospitals for developing and implementing a THA/TKA data collection system to avoid penalties for the hospital. Further implementation for outpatient surgery and in ambulatory surgery centers has been announced by CMS. Major resources will be needed to succeed in the expected capture rates.

Improving the Safety of Computed Tomography Through Automated Quality Measurement: A Radiologist Reader Study of Radiation Dose, Image Noise, and Image Quality.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services funded the development of a computed tomography (CT) quality measure for use in pay-for-performance programs, which balances automated assessments of radiation dose with image quality to incentivize dose reduction without compromising the diagnostic utility of the tests. However, no existing quantitative method for assessing CT image quality has been validated against radiologists' image quality assessments on a large number of CT examinations. Thus to develop an automated measure of image quality, we tested the relationship between radiologists' subjective ratings of image quality with measurements of radiation dose and image noise. Board-certified, posttraining, clinically active radiologists rated the image quality of 200 diagnostic CT examinations from a set of 734, representing 14 CT categories. Examinations with significant distractions, motion, or artifact were excluded. Radiologists rated diagnostic image quality as excellent, adequate, marginally acceptable, or poor; the latter 2 were considered unacceptable for rendering diagnoses. We quantified the relationship between ratings and image noise and radiation dose, by category, by analyzing the odds of an acceptable rating per standard deviation (SD) increase in noise or geometric SD (gSD) in dose. One hundred twenty-five radiologists contributed 24,800 ratings. Most (89%) were acceptable. The odds of an examination being rated acceptable statistically significantly increased per gSD increase in dose and decreased per SD increase in noise for most categories, including routine dose head, chest, and abdomen-pelvis, which together comprise 60% of examinations performed in routine practice. For routine dose abdomen-pelvis, the most common category, each gSD increase in dose raised the odds of an acceptable rating (2.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.98-3.24), whereas each SD increase in noise decreased the odds (0.90; 0.79-0.99). For only 2 CT categories, high-dose head and neck/cervical spine, neither dose nor noise was associated with ratings. Radiation dose and image noise correlate with radiologists' image quality assessments for most CT categories, making them suitable as automated metrics in quality programs incentivizing reduction of excessive radiation doses.

Medicare, Medicaid, and dual enrollment for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Given high rates of un- and underemployment among disabled people, adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities rely on Medicaid, Medicare, or both to pay for healthcare. Many disabled adults are Medicare eligible before the age of 65 but little is known as to why some receive Medicare services while others do not. We described the duration of Medicare enrollment for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities in 2019 and then compared demographics by enrollment type (Medicare-only, Medicaid-only, dual-enrolled). Additionally, we examined the percent in each enrollment type by state, and differences in enrollment type for those with Down syndrome. 2019 Medicare and Medicaid claims data for all adults (≥18 years) in the US with claim codes for intellectual disability, Down syndrome, or autism at any time between 2011 and 2019. Administrative claims cohort. Data were from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System Analytic Files and Medicare Beneficiary Summary files. In 2019, Medicare insured 582,868 adults with identified intellectual disability, autism, or Down syndrome. Of 582,868 Medicare beneficiaries, 149,172 were Medicare only and 433,396 were dual-enrolled. Most Medicare enrollees were enrolled as child dependents (61.5%) Medicaid-only enrollees (N = 819,256) were less likely to be white non-Hispanic (58.5% white non-Hispanic vs. 72.9% white non-Hispanic in dual-enrolled), more likely to be Hispanic (19.6% Hispanic vs. 9.2% Hispanic in dual-enrolled) and were younger (mean 34.2 years vs. 50.5 years dual-enrolled). There is heterogeneity in public insurance enrollment which is associated with state and disability type. Action is needed to ensure all are insured in the program that works for their healthcare needs.

Longitudinal Care Network Changes and Associated Healthcare Utilization Among Care Recipients.

This study examines caregiver networks, including size, composition, and stability, and their associations with the likelihood of hospitalization and skilled-nursing facility (SNF) admissions. Data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study linked to Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services data were analyzed for 3855 older adults across five survey waves. Generalized estimating equation models assessed the associations. The findings indicate each additional paid caregiver was associated with higher adjusted risk ratios (aRR) for hospitalization (aRR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.10-1.41) and SNF admission (aRR = 1.28, 95% CI 1.06-1.54) among care recipients, a pattern that is also observed with the addition of unpaid caregivers (hospitalization: aRR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.20; SNF: aRR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.02-1.23). These results suggest that policies and approaches to enhance the quality and coordination of caregivers may be warranted to support improved outcomes for care recipients.

Gene Therapy Versus Common Care for Eligible Individuals With Sickle Cell Disease in the United States : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Sickle cell disease (SCD) and its complications contribute to high rates of morbidity and early mortality and high cost in the United States and African heritage community. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of gene therapy for SCD and its value-based prices (VBPs). Comparative modeling analysis across 2 independently developed simulation models (University of Washington Model for Economic Analysis of Sickle Cell Cure [UW-MEASURE] and Fred Hutchinson Institute Sickle Cell Disease Outcomes Research and Economics Model [FH-HISCORE]) using the same databases. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims data, 2008 to 2016; published literature. Persons eligible for gene therapy. Lifetime. U.S. health care sector and societal. Gene therapy versus common care. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), equity-informed VBPs, and price acceptability curves. At an assumed $2 million price for gene therapy, UW-MEASURE and FH-HISCORE estimated ICERs of $193 000 per QALY and $427 000 per QALY, respectively, under the health care sector perspective. Corresponding estimates from the societal perspective were $126 000 per QALY and $281 000 per QALY. The difference in results between models stemmed primarily from considering a slightly different target population and incorporating the quality-of-life (QOL) effects of splenic sequestration, priapism, and acute chest syndrome in the UW model. From a societal perspective, acceptable (>90% confidence) VBPs ranged from $1 million to $2.5 million depending on the use of alternative effective metrics or equity-informed threshold values. Results were sensitive to the costs of myeloablative conditioning before gene therapy, effect on caregiver QOL, and effect of gene therapy on long-term survival. The short-term effects of gene therapy on vaso-occlusive events were extrapolated from 1 study. Gene therapy for SCD below a $2 million price tag is likely to be cost-effective when applying a societal perspective at an equity-informed threshold for cost-effectiveness analysis. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Survey Protocols, Response Rates, and Representation of Underserved Patients

Surveys often underrepresent certain patients, such as underserved patients. Methods that improve their response rates (RRs) would help patient surveys better represent their experiences and assess equity and equity-targeted quality improvement efforts. To estimate the effect of adding an initial web mode to existing Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey protocols and extending the fielding period on RR and representativeness of underserved patient groups. This randomized clinical trial included 36 001 patients discharged from 46 US hospitals from May through December 2021. Data analysis was performed from May 2022 to September 2023. Patients were randomized to 1 of 6 survey protocols: 3 standard HCAHPS protocols (mail only, phone only, mail-phone) plus 3 web-enhanced protocols (web-mail, web-phone, web-mail-phone). RR and number of respondents per 100 survey attempts (yield) were calculated and compared for each of the 6 survey protocols, overall, and by patient age, service line, sex, and race and ethnicity. A total of 34 335 patients (median age range, 55-59 years; 59.3% female individuals and 40.7% male individuals) were eligible and included in the study. Of the respondents, 6.9% were Asian American or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 0.7% were American Indian or Alaska Native, 11.5% were Black, 17.4% were Hispanic, 61.0% were White, and 2.6% were multiracial. Of the 6 protocols, RRs were highest in web-mail-phone (36.5%), intermediate for the 3 two-mode survey protocols (mail-phone, web-mail, web-phone, 30.3%-31.1%), and lowest for the 2 single-mode protocols (mail only, phone only, 22.1%-24.3%). Web-mail-phone resulted in the highest yield for 3 racial and ethnic groups (Black, Hispanic, and White patients) and second highest for another (multiracial patients). Otherwise, the highest or second highest yield was almost always a 2-mode protocol. Mail only was the lowest-yield protocol for Black, Hispanic, and multiracial patients and phone-only was the lowest-yield protocol for White patients; these 2 protocols tied for lowest-yield for Asian American or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander patients. Gains from multimode approaches were often 2 to 3 times as large for Asian American or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, and multiracial patients as for White patients. Web-mail-phone had the highest RR for 6 of 8 age groups and 4 of 5 combinations of service line and sex. In this randomized clinical trial, web-first multimode survey protocols significantly improved the RR and representativeness of patient surveys. The best-performing protocol based on RR and representativeness was web-mail-phone. Web-phone performed well for young and diverse patient populations, and web-mail for older and less diverse patient populations. The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will allow hospitals to use the web-mail, web-phone, and web-mail-phone protocols for HCAHPS administration beginning in 2025.

Striving for affordable medicine: Lessons in price negotiation learned from the United Kingdom.

In August 2022, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services were granted unprecedented power to negotiate the price of some pharmaceuticals covered under Medicare Part D of the Inflation Reduction Act. Price negotiation was previously banned by Medicare Part D legislation but is not a new idea globally. For decades, nations like the United Kingdom have price set or negotiated the cost of medicine with manufacturers, fine-tuning their methodologies, with mixed success. The United States can learn from other countries' work to develop a methodology capable of achieving increased affordability and patient access to medicine. Secretary Xavier Becerra should consider the United Kingdom's policy approach, which facilitates early and transparent collaboration with key stakeholders like patient groups and industry but limits flexibility in evidence submission, to help the United States minimize unintended damage to patient access to new medicines and achieve the Inflation Reduction Act's goals.

Assessing clinical benefit in the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program: A 2-step approach for improving transparency, consistency, and meaningful patient engagement.

In early 2024, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) will send initial price offers to the manufacturers of the first 10 drugs selected for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, established under the Inflation Reduction Act. However, CMS has not specified exactly how it will adjust the starting point for an initial price offer based on assessment of a drug's clinical benefit. This article addresses unanswered questions relating to CMS' methods for assessing clinical benefit. Specifically, we address how CMS can weigh various measures of evidence, ensure transparency and consistency, meaningfully incorporate patient and other stakeholder perspectives, and support addressing evidence gaps. We propose a 2-step approach for assessing the overall clinical benefit of a selected drug compared with its therapeutic alternatives that builds on the framework outlined by CMS. In step 1, CMS would evaluate conventional clinical benefit, defined in terms of outcomes commonly used in clinical studies for the selected drug and indications. In step 2, CMS would evaluate other outcomes broadly related to patient experience that are not adequately represented in the clinical literature. Overall, our approach incorporates the advantages of both qualitative and quantitative approaches to value assessment and decision-making. We describe a set of loose decision rules to improve transparency and consistency, recommend incorporating ranks and weights to signal to researchers and manufacturers which elements of clinical benefit and sources of data are the most important, and center meaningful deliberation with clinical experts, patients, and caregivers.

Practical Implications of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Radiation Oncology Case Rate Program Proposal for Radiation Oncologists

The American Society for Radiation Oncology has proposed the Radiation Oncology Case Rate Program (ROCR) to advocate for fair reimbursement for radiation oncologists. ROCR would replace Medicare fee-for-service with a case rate payment for each of the 15 most common cancer types treated with external beam or stereotactic radiation therapy. This topic discussion attempts to provide a concise overview of the practical implications for radiation oncologists should the ROCR payment program be legislated by Congress and subsequently implemented by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This topic discussion covers the practical changes to billing and reimbursement, the Health Equity Achievement in Radiation Therapy payment, the Quality of Care requirement, and the available tool to calculate the effect of the ROCR based on an individual practice's case mix.

Longitudinal Reoperation Risk After Apical Prolapse Procedures in Women Aged 65 Years and Older.

To describe longitudinal reoperation risk among older women undergoing surgery for apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and to compare risk of reoperation for prolapse and complications among different surgical approaches. This nationwide, retrospective cohort study evaluated older adult women (aged 65 years and older) within the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' (CMS) 5% LDS (Limited Data Set) who underwent sacrocolpopexy, uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS), sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF), or colpocleisis, or their uterine-preserving equivalents, from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2018, with follow-up through 2019. The primary outcome was overall reoperation, and secondary outcomes included reoperation for POP and for complications. Rates were compared using χ 2 tests for categorical variables, Wilcoxon rank-sum for continuous variables and Kaplan Meier estimates of cumulative incidence. Death and exit from CMS insurance were considered as censoring events. We used cumulative incidence to calculate reoperation risk as a function of time at 1 year or more, 3 years or more, and 7 years or more. This cohort included 4,089 women who underwent surgery to treat apical POP from 2011 to 2018: 1,034 underwent sacrocolpopexy, 717 underwent USLS, 1,529 underwent SSLF, and 809 underwent colpocleisis. Demographics varied among patients for each POP surgery. Patients who underwent the different surgeries had differences in age ( P <.01), Charlson Comorbidity Index score ( P <.01), diabetes ( P <.01), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ( P <.01), hypertension ( P <.01), chronic pain ( P =.01), congestive heart failure ( P <.01), and concomitant hysterectomy ( P <.01). Reoperation rates were low and increased over time. The overall reoperation risk through 7 years was 7.3% for colpocleisis, 10.4% for USLS, 12.5% for sacrocolpopexy, and 15.0% for SSLF ( P <.01). Reoperation for recurrent POP through 7 years was 2.9% for colpocleisis, 7.3% for sacrocolpopexy, 7.7% for USLS, and 9.9% for SSLF ( P <.01). Reoperation for complications through 7 years was 5.3% for colpocleisis, 8.2% for sacrocolpopexy, 6.4% for USLS, and 8.2% for SSLF ( P <.01). The type of surgical repair is significantly associated with long-term risk of reoperation. Colpocleisis offers the least likelihood of reoperation for prolapse, followed by sacrocolpopexy; colpocleisis followed by USLS has the least risk of long-term reoperation for complication.

Trends in Medicare Reimbursements for Commonly Performed Laryngeal Procedures from 2000 to 2021.

Numerous studies among different specialties have suggested that inflation-adjusted Medicare reimbursements have steadily declined in the last few decades. The objective of this study is to investigate whether this is true within the field of laryngology. Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Fee Schedule. 2000-2021 fees for laryngeal surgeries (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] codes 31530, 31531, 31535, 31536, 31540, 31541, 31545, 31546, 31551-31554, 31560, 31561, 31570), and laryngectomies (CPTs 31360, 31365, 31367, 31368, 31370, 31375, 31380, 31382, 31390, 31395) were gathered. United States consumer price index (CPI) was used to adjust all gathered data for inflation to 2021 US dollars. During the study period, unadjusted reimbursement for non-facility and facility laryngeal surgeries decreased an average of 6.1% and 6.6%, respectively. When adjusting for inflation, non-facility and facility laryngeal surgeries saw an average decrease of 17.8% (p < 0.001) and 28.5% (p < 0.001), respectively. Unadjusted reimbursement for facility laryngectomies saw an average increase of 40.2%, correlating to an inflation-adjusted decline of 8.9% (p < 0.001). Among laryngeal procedures overall, there was an average nominal increase of 17.0%, correlating to a 20.3% inflation-adjusted decline. In terms of inflation-adjusted dollars, reimbursements for laryngeal procedures have seen a large decrease in the last two decades. Understanding reimbursement trends is critical for sustainability of otolaryngology practices, and can be used by surgeons, hospital systems, and policymakers to guide future healthcare legislation.

Bridging the Telehealth Divide: Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Medicare Telehealth Usage Highlights the Need for Equity-Focused Approaches.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a dramatic increase in Medicare reimbursed telehealth utilization in the United States, but significant racial disparities persist. Methods: This research analyzed trends and disparities in Medicare reimbursed telehealth usage and claims from 2020 through 2022 using data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Results: Medicare telehealth user claims were 10.1 million in 2020, 52.7 million in 2021, and 85.3 million in 2023. The adjusted odds of telehealth use were significantly lower in 2021 (adjusted odds ratios [aORs]: 0.746; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.683-0.815) and 2022 (aOR: 0.529; 95% CI: 0.484-0.578) compared with 2020. Large racial differences were observed in 2020-2022, with lower telehealth usage among African Americans (aOR: 0.068; 95% CI: 0.054-0.087), Hispanics (aOR: 0.036; 95% CI: 0.027-0.047), American Indians/Alaska Natives (aOR: 0.012; 95% CI: 0.009-0.017), and Asian Pacific Americans (aOR: 0.001; 95% CI: 0.001-0.002) versus Non-Hispanic Whites. Rural residents, older adults, and beneficiaries with disabilities also had reduced telehealth utilization. However, women were more likely to use telehealth versus men (aOR: 1.689; 95% CI: 1.363-2.094). Conclusion: Despite telehealth expansion during the pandemic, significant disparities remain, highlighting the need for targeted efforts to increase access and reduce barriers among underserved populations. Addressing disparities is critical to ensuring equitable access to health care through telehealth.

Developing an initial set of quality indicators for chiropractic care: a scoping review

BackgroundQuality indicators are standardized, evidence-based measures of health care quality. Currently, there is no basic set of quality indicators for chiropractic care published in peer-reviewed literature. The goal of this research is to develop a preliminary set of quality indicators, measurable with administrative data.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review searching PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Index to Chiropractic Literature databases. Eligible articles were published after 2011, in English, developing/reporting best practices and clinical guidelines specifically developed for, or directly applicable to, chiropractic care. Eligible non-peer-reviewed sources such as quality measures published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Royal College of Chiropractors quality standards were also included. Following a stepwise eligibility determination process, data abstraction identified specific statements from included sources that can conceivably be measured with administrative data. Once identified, statements were transformed into potential indicators by: 1) Generating a brief title and description; 2) Documenting a source; 3) Developing a metric; and 4) Assigning a Donabedian category (structure, process, outcome). Draft indicators then traversed a 5-step assessment: 1) Describes a narrowly defined structure, process, or outcome; 2) Quantitative data can conceivably be available; 3) Performance is achievable; 4) Metric is relevant; 5) Data are obtainable within reasonable time limits. Indicators meeting all criteria were included in the final set.ResultsLiterature searching revealed 2562 articles. After removing duplicates and conducting eligibility determination, 18 remained. Most were clinical guidelines (n = 10) and best practice recommendations (n = 6), with 1 consensus and 1 clinical standards development study. Data abstraction and transformation produced 204 draft quality indicators. Of those, 57 did not meet 1 or more assessment criteria. After removing duplicates, 70 distinct indicators remained. Most indicators matched the Donabedian category of process (n = 35), with 31 structure and 4 outcome indicators. No sources were identified to support indicator development from patient perspectives.ConclusionsThis article proposes a preliminary set of 70 quality indicators for chiropractic care, theoretically measurable with administrative data and largely obtained from electronic health records. Future research should assess feasibility, achieve stakeholder consensus, develop additional indicators including those considering patient perspectives, and study relationships with clinical outcomes.Trial registrationOpen Science Framework, https://osf.io/t7kgm

The mechanics of risk adjustment and incentives for coding intensity in Medicare.

To study diagnosis coding intensity across Medicare programs, and to examine the impacts of changes in the risk model adopted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for 2024. Claims and encounter data from the CMS data warehouse for Traditional Medicare (TM) beneficiaries and Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees. We created cohorts of MA enrollees, TM beneficiaries attributed to Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), and TM non-ACO beneficiaries. Using the 2019 Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) software from CMS, we computed HCC prevalence and scores from base records, then computed incremental prevalence and scores from health risk assessments (HRA) and chart review (CR) records. We used CMS's 2019 random 20% sample of individuals and their 2018 diagnosis history, retaining those with 12 months of Parts A/B/D coverage in 2018. Measured health risks for MA and TM ACO individuals were comparable in base records for propensity-score matched cohorts, while TM non-ACO beneficiaries had lower risk. Incremental health risk due to diagnoses in HRA records increased across coverage cohorts in line with incentives to maximize risk scores: +0.9% for TM non-ACO, +1.2% for TM ACO, and + 3.6% for MA. Including HRA and CR records, the MA risk scores increased by 9.8% in the matched cohort. We identify the HCC groups with the greatest sensitivity to these sources of coding intensity among MA enrollees, comparing those groups to the new model's areas of targeted change. Consistent with previous literature, we find increased health risk in MA associated with HRA and CR records. We also demonstrate the meaningful impacts of HRAs on health risk measurement for TM coverage cohorts. CMS's model changes have the potential to reduce coding intensity, but they do not target the full scope of hierarchies sensitive to coding intensity.

Psychometric analysis of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (HOOS-JR)

ObjectiveCenters for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has requested hospitals collect and report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) beginning in 2024 including the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (HOOS-JR). However, scale structural validity of the HOOS-JR has minimally been assessed. The purpose of this study was to assess internal consistency, structural validity, and multi-group invariance properties of the HOOS-JR in a large sample of patients who underwent a total hip arthroplasty (THA). MethodsA cross-sectional study using the Surgical Outcomes System was retrospectively queried for patients who underwent a THA. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's Omega. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed on the HOOS-JR using a priori cut-off values. Multi-group invariance testing was also performed on the sample of patients across sex and age groups. ResultsInternal consistency was acceptable for 6-item (alpha ​= ​0.88; omega ​= ​0.88) and 5-item (alpha ​= ​0.86; omega ​= ​0.86) HOOS-JR. The one-factor, 6-item CFA did not meet the recommended fit indices. The one-factor, 5-item CFA had acceptable fit for the sample data. Invariance testing criteria were met between the age groups; however, scalar invariance was not met for sex. ConclusionThe 6-item HOOS-JR did not meet contemporary model fit indices indicating that scale refinement is warranted. The 5-item met most goodness-of-fit indices and invariance criteria. However, further scale refinement may be warranted as localized fit issues were identified.

Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty Places a Disproportionate Burden on Surgeons: A Comparison Using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA TLX)

BackgroundPerceived surgeon workload of performing primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging to quantify. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA TLX) survey was developed to quantify experiences following aviation and has been applied to healthcare fields. Our purposes were to 1) quantify the workload endured by surgeons who are performing primary and revision TKA and THA and 2) compare these values to their Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement. MethodsA prospective cohort of 5 fellowship-trained adult reconstruction surgeons completed NASA TLX surveys following primary and revision TKA/THA cases. A total of 122 surveys consisting of 70 TKA (48 primaries and 22 revisions) and 55 THA surveys (38 primaries and 17 revisions) were completed. Patient demographics and surgical variables were recorded. Final NASA TLX workloads were compared to 2021 CMS work relative value units. ResultsCompared to primary TKA, revision TKA had 176% increased intraoperative workload (P < .001), 233% increased mental burden (P < .001), and 150% increased physical burden (P < .001). Compared to primary THA, revision THA had 106% increased intraoperative workload (P < .001), 96% increased mental burden (P < .001), and 91% increased physical burden (P < .001). Operative time was higher in revision versus primary TKA (118 versus 84.5 minutes, P = .05) and THA (150 versus 115 minutes, P = .001). Based upon 2021 CMS data, revision TKA and THA would need to be compensated by an additional 36% and 12.3%, respectively, to parallel intraoperative efforts. ConclusionsRevision hip and knee arthroplasty places a major mental and physical workload upon surgeons and is disproportionately compensated by CMS.

Performance of Claims-Based Algorithms for Adherence to Positive Airway Pressure Therapy in Commercially Insured Patients With OSA

BackgroundPositive airway pressure (PAP) therapy is first line therapy for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), but consistent use is required for it to be effective. Previous studies have used Medicare fee-for-service claims data (e.g., device and equipment charges) as a proxy for PAP adherence to assess its effects. However, this approach has not been validated in a United States (US) commercially insured population, where coverage rules are not standardized. Research QuestionIn a commercially insured population in the US, how well do claims-based algorithms for defining PAP adherence correspond with objective PAP device usage? Study Design and MethodsDe-identified administrative claims data of commercially insured patients (18-64 years) with OSA were linked to objective PAP therapy usage data from cloud-connected devices. Adherence was defined based on device use (using an extension of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 90-day compliance criteria) and from claims-based algorithms to compare usage metrics and identify potential misclassifications. ResultsThe final sample included 213,341 patients. Based on device usage, 48% were adherent in the first year. Based on claims, between 10 and 84% of patients were identified as adherent (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity ranges: 53-68%, 12-95%, 26-92%, respectively). Relative to claims-adherent patients, device-adherent patients had consistently higher usage across all metrics (mean: 339.9 vs. 260.0-290.0 days of use; 6.6 vs. 5.1-5.6 days per week; 6.4 vs. 4.6-5.2 hours per day). Consistent PAP users were frequently identified by claims-based algorithms as non-adherent, while many inconsistent users were classified by claims-based algorithms as adherent. InterpretationIn aggregate US commercial data with non-standardized PAP coverage rules, concordance between existing claims-based definitions and objective PAP use was low. Caution is warranted when applying existing claims-based algorithms to commercial populations. Clinical Trials Registration NumberNot applicable

Impact of skilled nursing facility (SNF) 3-day hospitalization requirement waiver during the COVID-19 pandemic on emergency department and inpatient SNF discharges in California.

We sought to study the impact of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid services (CMS) waiver of the 3-day hospitalization requirement for skilled nursing facility (SNF) care implemented as part of the Federal COVID-19 response on emergency department (ED) and inpatient hospital SNF discharges. We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of hospital ED and inpatient visits in California during 18 months before (prewaiver, September 2018-February 2020) and 18 months after (waiver, March 2020-August 2021) waiver implementation. Data were collected from all adult ED and admitted patients utilizing California Department of Health Care Access and Information datasets from all acute care hospitals licensed in the state. Prewaiver and waiver periods were compared for SNF discharge/disposition rates stratified by patient demographic and hospital data with differences in the proportion and 95% confidence interval [CI] reported (SPSS). SNF discharges decreased from the prewaiver to waiver periods from the ED (-7.4% [CI -8.1%, -6.6%]), along with larger declines occurring from the inpatient hospital setting (-18.1% [CI -18.4%, -17.9%]). For Medicare beneficiaries, there was a smaller decrease in ED SNF rates (-3.8% [CI -4.7%, -2.9%]), and there was no significant change for SNF discharge rates for inpatient admissions with a length of stay (LOS)<3 days (+1.0% [CI 0.0%, 2.1%]). In California, the CMS waiver did not result in an increase, but an actual decrease rate of SNF discharges from the ED and inpatient setting, though with smaller declines for the ED, Medicare patients, and those with a LOS<3 days.