Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the relationship between the Global Budget Revenue (GBR) model and surgical outcomes. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Medicare tested GBR in Maryland, wherein hospitals received a fixed annual revenue to cover healthcare delivery for their population. The relationship between GBR implementation and outcomes after cancer surgery is unclear. METHODS:Observational difference-in-differences analysis using 100% national Medicare data to compare changes in outcomes between GBR hospitals and matched control hospitals before (2011-2013) and after (2014-2018) policy implementation in Traditional Medicare beneficiaries undergoing cystectomy, prostatectomy, or nephrectomy for cancer. The primary outcome was achievement of a textbook outcome, defined as the absence of in-hospital and 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, a prolonged length of stay (i.e., above the 75th percentile by procedure and year) and readmission within 30 days of discharge. The secondary outcome was Medicare inpatient spending. RESULTS:This study included 23 Maryland hospitals with 4,910 beneficiaries and 371 control hospitals with 57,456 beneficiaries. Textbook outcomes increased from 72.8% to 76.1% in GBR hospitals and from 70.2% to 70.5% in matched controls, a differential increase of 2.9 percentage points (95% CI, 0.5 to 5.3; P=0.02). The greater improvement at GBR hospitals was a result of reducing complications (-1.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.9 to -0.1) and limiting prolonged lengths of stay (-1.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.9 to -0.7). Medicare inpatient spending declined by $771 (95% CI, -$1,275 to -$267) more at GBR hospitals. CONCLUSIONS:The GBR was associated with improved surgical outcomes and lower Medicare inpatient spending.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:To examine the relationships between state Medicaid total Long-Term Services and Supports (LTSS) expenditures and the LTSS rebalancing ratio (i.e., the proportion allocated to Home- and Community-Based Services [HCBS]) with the self-reported health of spousal caregivers of community-dwelling older adults with dementia. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This study used multiple data sources, including the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and annual Medicaid LTSS user and expenditure reports. The analytic sample included 1,232 respondent-waves of spousal caregivers who participated in at least one of the seven HRS waves between 2008 and 2020 and provided care for their community-dwelling spouse with dementia. We employed generalized linear models (GLMs) for both bivariate and multivariable analyses, with the outcome of interest being a dichotomous variable for self-reported poor health. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Each additional $1,000 of annual LTSS spending per older adult was associated with a marginally significant 4.2-percentage point reduction in the probability of reporting poor health (Average Marginal Effect [AME] in percentage points [PP] = -4.21, 95 % Confidence Interval [CI] = -9.12-0.70, p = 0.093). However, no statistically significant association was observed between the LTSS rebalancing ratio and spousal caregivers' self-reported health (AME in PP = 2.22, 95 % CI = -2.07-6.49, p = 0.310). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Higher state Medicaid LTSS spending per older adult was moderately associated with better self-reported health among spousal caregivers of individuals with dementia. As the demand for informal caregiving continues to rise, this study underscores the importance of state investments in protecting caregivers' health and highlights the need to incorporate caregiver-focused assessments into the design and evaluation of LTSS policies.

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Spending benchmarks in the Medicare Shared Savings Program previously only considered an accountable care organization's (ACO) historical spending, potentially disadvantaging efficient organizations in favor of inefficient ones. To more sustainably reward efficient ACOs, benchmark calculation has evolved, such as the incorporation of average regional spending in 2017, but how benchmarking policy, and its changes, have affected the financial performance of ACOs across the efficiency spectrum remains unclear. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To measure the association between ACO efficiency on entry (ie, the ratio of observed to expected spending) with earning a shared savings bonus. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This cross-sectional study used a 20% national sample of Medicare claims to identify ACOs that participated in the Shared Savings Program for a minimum of 4 years between January 2013 and December 2020. ACOs were sorted in quartiles based on their observed to expected spending ratio in their first year of participants. Data analysis was conducted from July 2024 to May 2025. EXPOSURE/UNASSIGNED:Quartiles of ACO efficiency with a higher spending ratio denoting lower efficiency. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:The primary outcome was receipt of a shared savings bonus in the second, third, and fourth agreement years. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between ACO efficiency quartiles and earning a bonus and how the regional benchmark adjustment in 2017 affected this association across measured agreement years. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Across 402 ACOs, the median (IQR) spending ratio was 1.000 (0.993- 1.005). After adjustment, the most efficient ACOs (ie, lowest quartile of the spending ratio) had an increased probability of earning a bonus from 24.4% (95% CI, 15.3%-33.4%) to 45.2% (95% CI, 35.4%-55.0%) after the 2017 introduction of the regional benchmark adjustment. However, the least efficient ACOs (ie, top quartile of the spending ratio) were significantly more likely to earn bonuses prior to (43.8%; 95% CI, 33.7%-53.9%) and after (60.7%; 95% CI, 51.3%-70.1%) the benchmarking change, without evidence that this gap narrowed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:In this cross-sectional study, ACOs across the range of efficiency on entry had greater odds of earning bonuses after the introduction of the regional benchmark adjustment in 2017. However, less efficient ACOs had significantly greater odds of earning bonuses compared with more efficient ACOs, before and after the policy change.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the association between implementation of "Pathways to Success" and quality among beneficiaries cared for in Shared Savings Program accountable care organizations (ACOs). STUDY SETTING AND DESIGN/METHODS:Medicare initiated "Pathways to Success" in 2019 that required upside-risk only ACOs in Shared Savings Program to transition to a two-sided risk model and prior two-sided ACOs to assume even greater financial responsibility. We examined the association between Pathways and ACO-targeted (hospitalizations for congestive heart failure [CHF] and all-cause 30-day readmissions) and nontargeted (all-cause emergency department visits without hospitalization for CHF and hospital observation stays) quality measures, using a difference-in-differences framework. DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE/UNASSIGNED:Data were extracted from a 20% sample of national Medicare data from 2018 to 2020. This study included 810,070 beneficiary-quarters in 514 ACOs, and 813,855 beneficiary-quarters never attributed to an ACO (i.e., controls). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS/RESULTS:Implementation of Pathways was not associated with significant relative changes in the quarterly number of CHF admissions (decreasing from 97.98 to 82.04 per 1000 beneficiaries in ACOs; differential change = 3.51 quarterly CHF admissions per 1000 beneficiaries, 95% CI, -4.82 to 11.85) or the quarterly number of emergency department visits for CHF (decreasing from 110.90 to 97.50 per 1000 beneficiaries in ACOs; differential change = 6.47 quarterly CHF emergency department visits per 1000 beneficiaries, 95% CI, -3.71 to 16.64). However, quarterly rates of 30-day all-cause readmissions increased slightly by 0.61% points (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.98; unadjusted readmissions increased from 14.49% to 14.81% in ACOs) after Pathways implementation. Observation stays remained unchanged (differential change = -0.16% points, 95% CI, -0.33 to 0.02; unadjusted observation stays increased from 3.64% to 3.94% in ACOs) after the launch of Pathways. CONCLUSIONS:Medicare's Pathways to Success, which introduced two-sided risk, was not associated with improvement in select quality measures.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the Maryland All-Payer Model's impact on the rate of elective major joint replacement surgery. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:A retrospective cohort study of patients in Maryland undergoing elective major joint replacement between 2011 and 2018 was performed using a 20% fee-for-service Medicare sample in a difference-in-difference framework with patients undergoing hip fracture repair serving as controls. METHODS:Among Maryland residents, there were 7147 Medicare fee-for-service patients undergoing elective major joint replacement and 1008 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries undergoing hip fracture repair. We used patient-level generalized linear models with a negative binomial family function and a log link function to estimate the association of the All-Payer Model with the rate of elective major joint replacement surgery. RESULTS:Under the All-Payer Model, the rate of elective major joint replacement surgery increased more than that of hip fracture repair (adjusted relative risk, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.15-1.51). Compared with hospitals without affiliates in adjacent states (Maryland-only hospitals), those with affiliates (Maryland hospitals with affiliates) saw rates of elective major joint replacement grow more slowly (adjusted relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.95) after the All-Payer Model. Furthermore, major joint replacement rates for Maryland residents at affiliated hospitals in adjacent states increased from 4.26 per 10,000 in the preintervention period to 5.23 per 10,000 in the postintervention period. CONCLUSIONS:Under the All-Payer Model, population-based rates of elective major joint replacement surgery increased more rapidly than did rates of hip fracture repair. Although rates of major joint replacement at Maryland hospitals with affiliates grew more slowly than for Maryland-only hospitals, rates among Maryland residents increased at the affiliates in adjacent states.

This observational cohort study examined the association between Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) and hospital and skilled nursing facility (SNF) utilization among community-dwelling older adults aged 65 and older. Using four waves of longitudinal survey data from the 2016-2022 Health and Retirement Study conducted by the University of Michigan and multivariate, individual-level regressions, we found that the cognitive impairment but no dementia (CIND) and ADRD groups exhibited similar patterns in hospitalizations, hospital visits, and total hospital days compared to the normal cognition group. However, CIND was significantly associated with increased odds of SNF stays (odds ratio [OR], 1.22) and a higher number of SNF visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.45) than the normal cognition group. Higher odds of any SNF stay (OR, 1.26) and number of SNF visits (IRR, 1.45) were also observed for ADRD compared to normal cognition. These findings suggest that CIND or ADRD was not associated with hospital use but was significantly associated with increased SNF use.

OBJECTIVE:To assess the association between skilled nursing facility (SNF) utilization and Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN/METHODS:An observational cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:The study included community-dwelling respondents aged 65 or older. METHODS:This study analyzed data from 3 waves of the Health and Retirement Study and employed multivariable, individual-level regressions. The primary outcomes were any SNF stays, the number of SNF stays, and the total number of SNF days, in the past 2 years of the survey. Respondents were classified as cognitively normal, having cognitive impairment but not dementia (CIND), or having ADRD. RESULTS:The study included 23,654 respondent-years, representing 12,529 unique respondents. Before the pandemic, differences in any SNF stays, and the number of SNF stays between the cognitively normal and CIND and ADRD groups were statistically insignificant in multivariable regressions. During the pandemic, compared with respondents with normal cognition, those with CIND had higher odds of any SNF stays (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.06-2.20) and more SNF stays (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 2.40; 95% CI, 1.30-4.40); similarly, the ADRD group showed higher odds of any SNF stays (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.08-2.59) and more SNF stays (IRR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.36-4.47) than cognitively normal older adults. The total number of SNF days for CIND and ADRD respondents remained statistically insignificantly different from those of the cognitively normal group, both before and during the pandemic, in regression analyses. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:This cohort study suggests that the pandemic was associated with increased differences in any SNF stays and number of transitions to SNFs between cognitively normal individuals and those with CIND or ADRD. These findings provide a foundation for understanding the potential impact of a public health emergency on post-acute care utilization among older adults with varying degrees of cognitive impairment.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the early effects of Pathways to Success implementation on utilization, as measured by quarterly price-standardized Medicare spending per beneficiary. STUDY SETTING AND DESIGN/METHODS:This study was a nationwide retrospective cohort analysis of Traditional Medicare beneficiaries. The primary outcome was overall utilization, as measured by adjusted quarterly price standardized spending per beneficiary. Secondary outcomes included adjusted quarterly price standardized spending by component type (inpatient, outpatient institutional, Part B, and skilled nursing facility). The primary independent variable is Pathways to Success implementation on July 1, 2019. DATA SOURCES AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE/UNASSIGNED:A 20% sample of national Medicare data from January 1, 2018, through March 31, 2020, includes Traditional Medicare beneficiaries managed in ACOs (n = 1,368,523) and outside of ACOs ("controls," n = 1,476,982) prior to Pathways implementation. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS/RESULTS:Unadjusted quarterly spending among those in ACOs and controls decreased over the study period by $13.5 (from $2614.8 before Pathways implementation to $2601.3 after Pathways implementation) and $89.8 (from $2723.1 before Pathways implementation to $2633.3 after Pathways implementation), respectively. Adjusted quarterly spending per beneficiary decreased more slowly in ACOs compared to controls (differences-in-differences estimate +$46.8 (95% CI $19.2, $74.4) in ACOs vs. controls). This difference was largely driven by a more rapid decrease in the utilization of inpatient care. Adjusted quarterly spending per beneficiary for inpatient care decreased more slowly in ACOs compared to controls (differences-in-differences estimate +$43.6 [95% CI $27.2, $60.0] in ACOs vs. controls). CONCLUSIONS:After Pathways, reductions in utilization, as measured by price-standardized spending, by ACOs occurred less rapidly than for those managed outside of the Shared Savings Program. This effect was driven by a more rapid decrease in spending for inpatient care by nonparticipants.