Susannah G Cafardi1, Jesse M Pines2, Partha Deb3, Christopher A Powers4, William H Shrank5. 1. Research and Rapid-Cycle Evaluation Group, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: Susannah.Cafardi@cms.hhs.gov. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, The George Washington University, Washington, DC; Department of Health Policy, The George Washington University, Washington, DC. 3. Department of Economics, Hunter College, New York, NY; Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation, Baltimore, MD. 4. Office of Information Products and Data Analytics, Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore, MD. 5. CVS Caremark, Birmingham, AL.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We examined trends in the use of observation services and the relationship between index service type (observation services, emergency department [ED] visits, inpatient stays) and both clinical outcomes and Medicare payments. METHODS: We created a yearly cohort panel of Medicare beneficiaries with chest pain. We evaluate the relationships between index service type and 30-day clinical outcomes using a multinomial logit model and between index service type and Medicare payments using generalized linear models. RESULTS: In 2009, 24% of patients with chest pain received observation services; this rose to 29% in 2011. Conversely, 20% were treated as hospital inpatients in 2009; this fell to 16% in 2011. In the adjusted analysis, the risk of 30-day return to the hospital was 7% less (95% confidence interval, 5%-8%) for those receiving observation services as compared with inpatients. Average Medicare payments ranged from $3032 for beneficiaries initially treated in the ED to $3885 for those initially treated in observation to $6545 for those initially treated as inpatients. DISCUSSION: Patients treated in observation are less likely than those treated in the ED or as inpatients to have an adverse event within 30 days. Adjusted Medicare payments, including the index stay and the subsequent 30 days, were substantially less for those treated in observation as compared with those treated as inpatients, but more than for those treated and released from the ED. Higher rates of observation service use do not appear to be negatively affecting patient outcomes and may lower costs relative to inpatient treatment. Published by Elsevier Inc.
INTRODUCTION: We examined trends in the use of observation services and the relationship between index service type (observation services, emergency department [ED] visits, inpatient stays) and both clinical outcomes and Medicare payments. METHODS: We created a yearly cohort panel of Medicare beneficiaries with chest pain. We evaluate the relationships between index service type and 30-day clinical outcomes using a multinomial logit model and between index service type and Medicare payments using generalized linear models. RESULTS: In 2009, 24% of patients with chest pain received observation services; this rose to 29% in 2011. Conversely, 20% were treated as hospital inpatients in 2009; this fell to 16% in 2011. In the adjusted analysis, the risk of 30-day return to the hospital was 7% less (95% confidence interval, 5%-8%) for those receiving observation services as compared with inpatients. Average Medicare payments ranged from $3032 for beneficiaries initially treated in the ED to $3885 for those initially treated in observation to $6545 for those initially treated as inpatients. DISCUSSION: Patients treated in observation are less likely than those treated in the ED or as inpatients to have an adverse event within 30 days. Adjusted Medicare payments, including the index stay and the subsequent 30 days, were substantially less for those treated in observation as compared with those treated as inpatients, but more than for those treated and released from the ED. Higher rates of observation service use do not appear to be negatively affecting patient outcomes and may lower costs relative to inpatient treatment. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Maame Yaa A B Yiadom; Christopher W Baugh; Cathy A Jenkins; Sean P Collins; Monisha C Bhatia; Robert S Dittus; Alan B Storrow Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2017-10-12 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Kumar Dharmarajan; Li Qin; Maggie Bierlein; Jennie E S Choi; Zhenqiu Lin; Nihar R Desai; Erica S Spatz; Harlan M Krumholz; Arjun K Venkatesh Journal: BMJ Date: 2017-06-20
Authors: Christine Eichelberger; Aarti Patel; Zhijie Ding; Christopher D Pericone; Jennifer H Lin; Christopher W Baugh Journal: Cardiol Ther Date: 2020-03-02
Authors: Angelo Navas; Billy Guzman; Almujtaba Hassan; Joseph B Borawski; Dean Harrison; Pratik Manandhar; Alaatin Erkanli; Alexander T Limkakeng Journal: West J Emerg Med Date: 2022-01-18