OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) in identifying hospitalization events and payment source among nursing home residents. RESEARCH DESIGN: The 2003 MDS, Medicare Provider Analysis and Review File (MedPAR), Medicare denominator file, Medicaid Analytical Extract (MAX) long-term care file, and MAX personal summary file for 4 states (California, Ohio, New York, and Texas) were obtained and merged. SETTING: All Medicare/Medicaid-certified nursing ho-mes in these 4 states during 2003. PARTICIPANTS: All nursing home residents who were eligible for Medicare. Medicare or Medicaid managed care enrollees were excluded. MEASUREMENTS: Using the identification by linking the MDS and claims data as the "gold standard," we calculated false negative and false positive error rates of the MDS in identifying hospitalization events and payment source. RESULTS: As for the accuracy of the MDS in identifying hospitalization events, the false negative error rates ranged from 6.8% to 19.5% and the false positive error rates were between 12.0% and 15.7%, depending on the state. With regard to the identification of Medicare payment source, the MDS had a low false negative rate (varying from 0.4% to 1.1%), and a relatively high false positive rate (ranging from 6.1% to 14.9%). The MDS alone did not seem to be a sufficient source for identification of Medicaid payment source (false negative rate ranging from 11.0% to 55.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of the MDS in identifying hospitalizations and payment sources varies across the study states, and should be evaluated carefully with regard to the intended uses of the data. Copyright Â
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) in identifying hospitalization events and payment source among nursing home residents. RESEARCH DESIGN: The 2003 MDS, Medicare Provider Analysis and Review File (MedPAR), Medicare denominator file, Medicaid Analytical Extract (MAX) long-term care file, and MAX personal summary file for 4 states (California, Ohio, New York, and Texas) were obtained and merged. SETTING: All Medicare/Medicaid-certified nursing ho-mes in these 4 states during 2003. PARTICIPANTS: All nursing home residents who were eligible for Medicare. Medicare or Medicaid managed care enrollees were excluded. MEASUREMENTS: Using the identification by linking the MDS and claims data as the "gold standard," we calculated false negative and false positive error rates of the MDS in identifying hospitalization events and payment source. RESULTS: As for the accuracy of the MDS in identifying hospitalization events, the false negative error rates ranged from 6.8% to 19.5% and the false positive error rates were between 12.0% and 15.7%, depending on the state. With regard to the identification of Medicare payment source, the MDS had a low false negative rate (varying from 0.4% to 1.1%), and a relatively high false positive rate (ranging from 6.1% to 14.9%). The MDS alone did not seem to be a sufficient source for identification of Medicaid payment source (false negative rate ranging from 11.0% to 55.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of the MDS in identifying hospitalizations and payment sources varies across the study states, and should be evaluated carefully with regard to the intended uses of the data. Copyright Â
Authors: Ellen F Binder; Robin L Kruse; Ashley K Sherman; Richard Madsen; Steven C Zweig; Ralph D'Agostino; David R Mehr Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Robin L Kruse; David R Mehr; Keith E Boles; Judith R Lave; Ellen F Binder; Richard Madsen; Ralph B D'Agostino Journal: Med Care Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Mark Loeb; Soo Chan Carusone; Ron Goeree; Stephen D Walter; Kevin Brazil; Paul Krueger; Andrew Simor; Lorraine Moss; Thomas Marrie Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-06-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Vincent Mor; Joseph Angelelli; Richard Jones; Jason Roy; Terry Moore; John Morris Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2003-11-04 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Dana B Mukamel; Thomas Caprio; Richard Ahn; Nan Tracy Zheng; Sally Norton; Timothy Quill; Helena Temkin-Greener Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Jordan M Harrison; Andrew W Dick; Elizabeth A Madigan; E Yoko Furuya; Ashley M Chastain; Jingjing Shang Journal: Am J Infect Control Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 4.303
Authors: Samuel T Savitz; Sally C Stearns; Jennifer S Groves; Anna M Kucharska-Newton; Lindsay G S Bengtson; Lisa Wruck Journal: Value Health Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Kali S Thomas; Benjamin Silver; Pedro L Gozalo; David Dosa; David C Grabowski; Rajesh Makineni; Vincent Mor Journal: Med Care Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 2.983