OBJECTIVE: Assess impact of nationwide home health quality improvement campaign to reduce acute care hospitalization of home health recipients. DESIGN: Observational pre-post comparison of self-selected participating and non-participating agencies' quality performance; survey to determine uptake of program materials. SETTING: US home health care agencies. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 147 agencies with 147 non-participating agencies matched on patient length of service, pre-intervention hospitalization rate and pre-intervention rate of change in hospitalization rate. INTERVENTION(S): Public events; provision of educational packages and technical assistance; quality measure feedback. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Post-intervention difference in risk-adjusted acute care hospitalization rate between participants and non-participants; difference in self-reported campaign material use between agencies whose hospitalization rate declined 2% or more and those whose rates increased by 2% or more. RESULTS: Hospitalization rate had a negative trend beginning before the campaign. In the matched pairs studied, it did not differ significantly between participants and non-participants, or from pre- to post-intervention period (28% in every case). Agencies that improved were more likely to report activities consistent with the campaign and using campaign interventions than those not improving (P < 0.001), regardless of participation status. CONCLUSIONS: Merely agreeing to participate in the campaign did not improve performance, but effective participation through adoption of campaign methods did.
OBJECTIVE: Assess impact of nationwide home health quality improvement campaign to reduce acute care hospitalization of home health recipients. DESIGN: Observational pre-post comparison of self-selected participating and non-participating agencies' quality performance; survey to determine uptake of program materials. SETTING: US home health care agencies. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 147 agencies with 147 non-participating agencies matched on patient length of service, pre-intervention hospitalization rate and pre-intervention rate of change in hospitalization rate. INTERVENTION(S): Public events; provision of educational packages and technical assistance; quality measure feedback. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Post-intervention difference in risk-adjusted acute care hospitalization rate between participants and non-participants; difference in self-reported campaign material use between agencies whose hospitalization rate declined 2% or more and those whose rates increased by 2% or more. RESULTS: Hospitalization rate had a negative trend beginning before the campaign. In the matched pairs studied, it did not differ significantly between participants and non-participants, or from pre- to post-intervention period (28% in every case). Agencies that improved were more likely to report activities consistent with the campaign and using campaign interventions than those not improving (P < 0.001), regardless of participation status. CONCLUSIONS: Merely agreeing to participate in the campaign did not improve performance, but effective participation through adoption of campaign methods did.