Eboni G Price-Haywood1,2, Hans Petersen3, Jeffrey Burton4, Jewel Harden-Barrios4, Mary Adubato4, Melissa Roberts5, Nathan Markward4. 1. Center for Applied Health Services Research, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA, USA. eboni.pricehaywood@ochsner.org. 2. Ochsner Clinical School, University of Queensland, New Orleans, LA, USA. eboni.pricehaywood@ochsner.org. 3. Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute, Albuquerque, NM, USA. 4. Center for Applied Health Services Research, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA, USA. 5. University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: U.S. health systems, incentivized by financial penalties, are designing programs such as case management to reduce service utilization among high-cost, high-need populations. The major challenge is identifying patients for whom targeted programs are most effective for achieving desired outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a health system's outpatient complex case management (OPCM) for Medicare beneficiaries for patients overall and for high-risk patients using system-tailored taxonomy, and examine whether OPCM lowers service utilization and healthcare costs. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study using Medicare data collected between 2012 and 2016 for Ochsner Health System. PARTICIPANTS: Super-utilizers defined as Medicare patients with at least two hospital/ED encounters within 180 days of the index date including the index event. INTERVENTION: Outpatient complex case management. MAIN MEASURES: Propensity score-adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted for primary outcomes (90-day hospital readmission; 90-day ED re-visit). A difference-in-difference analysis was conducted to examine changes in per membership per month (PMPM) costs based on OPCM exposure. KEY RESULTS: Among 18,882 patients, 1197 (6.3%) were identified as "high-risk" and 470 (2.5%) were OPCM participants with median enrollment of 49 days. High-risk OPCM cases compared to high-risk controls had lower odds of 90-day hospital readmissions (0.81 [0.40-1.61], non-significant) and lower odds of 90-day ED re-visits (0.50 [0.32-0.79]). Non-high-risk OPCM cases compared to non-high-risk controls had lower odds of 90-day hospital readmissions (0.20 [0.11-0.36]) and 90-day ED re-visits (0.66 [0.47-0.94]). Among OPCM cases, high-risk patients compared to non-high-risk patients had greater odds of 90-day hospital readmissions (4.44 [1.87-10.54]); however, there was no difference in 90-day ED re-visits (0.99 [0.58-1.68]). Overall, OPCM cases had lower total cost of care compared to controls (PMPM mean [SD]: - $1037.71 [188.18]). CONCLUSIONS: Use of risk stratification taxonomy for super-utilizers can identify patients most likely to benefit from case management. Future studies must further examine which OPCM components drive improvements in select outcome for specific populations.
BACKGROUND: U.S. health systems, incentivized by financial penalties, are designing programs such as case management to reduce service utilization among high-cost, high-need populations. The major challenge is identifying patients for whom targeted programs are most effective for achieving desired outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a health system's outpatient complex case management (OPCM) for Medicare beneficiaries for patients overall and for high-risk patients using system-tailored taxonomy, and examine whether OPCM lowers service utilization and healthcare costs. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study using Medicare data collected between 2012 and 2016 for Ochsner Health System. PARTICIPANTS: Super-utilizers defined as Medicare patients with at least two hospital/ED encounters within 180 days of the index date including the index event. INTERVENTION: Outpatient complex case management. MAIN MEASURES: Propensity score-adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted for primary outcomes (90-day hospital readmission; 90-day ED re-visit). A difference-in-difference analysis was conducted to examine changes in per membership per month (PMPM) costs based on OPCM exposure. KEY RESULTS: Among 18,882 patients, 1197 (6.3%) were identified as "high-risk" and 470 (2.5%) were OPCM participants with median enrollment of 49 days. High-risk OPCM cases compared to high-risk controls had lower odds of 90-day hospital readmissions (0.81 [0.40-1.61], non-significant) and lower odds of 90-day ED re-visits (0.50 [0.32-0.79]). Non-high-risk OPCM cases compared to non-high-risk controls had lower odds of 90-day hospital readmissions (0.20 [0.11-0.36]) and 90-day ED re-visits (0.66 [0.47-0.94]). Among OPCM cases, high-risk patients compared to non-high-risk patients had greater odds of 90-day hospital readmissions (4.44 [1.87-10.54]); however, there was no difference in 90-day ED re-visits (0.99 [0.58-1.68]). Overall, OPCM cases had lower total cost of care compared to controls (PMPM mean [SD]: - $1037.71 [188.18]). CONCLUSIONS: Use of risk stratification taxonomy for super-utilizers can identify patients most likely to benefit from case management. Future studies must further examine which OPCM components drive improvements in select outcome for specific populations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Medicare; case management; health services research; utilization
Authors: Chad Boult; Ariel Frank Green; Lisa B Boult; James T Pacala; Claire Snyder; Bruce Leff Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Jürgen Unützer; Michael Schoenbaum; Wayne J Katon; Ming-Yu Fan; Harold A Pincus; Diane Hogan; Jennifer Taylor Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2009-01-16 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Thanh G N Ton; Thomas DeLeire; Suepattra G May; Ningqi Hou; Mahlet G Tebeka; Er Chen; Joshua Chodosh Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2016-09-28 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Susan L Hayes; Claudia A Salzberg; Douglas McCarthy; David C Radley; Melinda K Abrams; Tanya Shah; Gerard F Anderson Journal: Issue Brief (Commonw Fund) Date: 2016-08
Authors: Eric Jutkowitz; Robert L Kane; Bryan Dowd; Joseph E Gaugler; Richard F MacLehose; Karen M Kuntz Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Markus C Elze; John Gregson; Usman Baber; Elizabeth Williamson; Samantha Sartori; Roxana Mehran; Melissa Nichols; Gregg W Stone; Stuart J Pocock Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-01-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Maureen A Smith; Menggang Yu; Jared D Huling; Xinyi Wang; Allie DeLonay; Jonathan Jaffery Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 7.076