Managed Care Information Center
MCIC Home
E-Mail MCIC
Site Navigation:
E-mail a Friend
FREE E-Mail Newsletters
Subscribe to the leading management newsletters
Search
Search
Affiliates
Health Resources Online
* * *
Health Resources Publishing
* * *
Wellness Junction
* * *
Healthcare Intelligence Network
Contact MCIC
info@themcic.com

Managed Care Information Center
1913 Atlantic Ave., Suite F4
Manasquan, NJ  08736
(732) 292-1100
fax: (732) 292-1111

Home / News & IndustryManaged Care Insight and Analysis
Updated: Feb. 10, 2009
Medicare Hospital P4P Program May Penalize Hospitals Caring For Large Numbers Of Poor

Medicare’s pay-for-performance program ranks and rewards hospitals, according to how well they meet certain guidelines for clinical care.

But researchers at Duke Clinical Research Institute said the program penalizes hospitals that care for the greatest numbers of the poor and needy by not taking into account their greater clinical burden.

Studies show that age, race and severity of disease can influence which patients get certain treatments and how they fare, and these factors vary significantly from hospital to hospital.

"That means that hospitals serving large groups of the elderly, women, poor, uninsured or African-American patients might have problems competing with institutions whose patients are younger, wealthy, insured and white," said Dr. Eric Peterson, a cardiologist at Duke and the senior author of the study. "Hospitals are simply not starting out on the same playing field."

Under the current pay-for-performance system, hospitals in the top 20 percent of the rankings receive financial reward; those in the middle 60 percent receive nothing, and those at the bottom stand to loose Medicare reimbursement money.

Currently, Medicare does not consider demographic variables and patients’ existing health problems in figuring hospital rankings.

Peterson and colleagues in the American Heart Association’s Get With the Guidelines program wanted to find out if those rankings would change if patient mix was included in the calculations. They examined Medicare beneficiary records of 148,472 heart attack patients in 449 hospitals across the country from 2000 to 2006. They analyzed the hospitals’ process performance on eight measures of clinical care taken from guidelines established by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

The measures included appropriate use of certain drugs, like aspirin, beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors and anti-clotting medications; and procedures, like angioplasty and counseling to support smoking cessation.

Investigators ranked the hospitals according to crude composite process performance scores and then grouped them according to Medicare’s current system.

Next, they ranked the same hospitals again, but this time taking into account the patients’ demographic variables, their clinical characteristics and eligibility for certain procedures.

They found that the hospitals with the lowest crude composite scores tended to be smaller, non-academic institutions that treated a higher percentage of older, sicker and minority patients than those in the top group.

While there was general agreement on performance between the two ranking systems, researchers found that when taking into account patient characteristics and treatment opportunity, 16.5 percent, or 74 of the hospitals would fall into a different financial status category.

So why doesn’t Medicare consider patient mix in tallying rankings? "On the surface, it may well seem to be the right thing to do, but some feel such a move would ‘legitimize’ less-than-optimal care," said Peterson. "At the same time, not taking these factors into consideration is like comparing apples to oranges."

Peterson said one solution might be to reward hospitals for improvement in adherence to evidence-based treatment, rather than rewarding a single score or ranking. Another option might involve separately reporting adherence data for older patients, women, or minorities. "That would surely draw more attention to any gaps in care, and might prompt better compliance."

Address: Duke Clinical Research Institute, North Pavilion, 2400 Pratt St., Durham, NC 27705; (919) 668-8700, www.dcri.duke.edu.


  This article was taken from:
Pay-For-Performance Reporter

Free Trial Subscription

Become a Subscriber

    Back to This Week's List of Articles

"Managed Care Weekly Watch"
Subscribe Here

Email:

Name:

 
Top | Home


Resource of the Month | Database of MCOs | Publications | News & Industry | Surveys & Research | Free Products | Advertising Arena | Inside MCIC | Managed Care Archives | ManagedCareMarketplace.com | For Subscribers | Customer Service

©2009 The Managed Care Information Center