Abstract:Importance: In several pay-for-performance programs, Medicare ties payments to readmission rates but accounts only for a limited set of patient characteristics-and no measures of social risk-when assessing performance of health care providers (clinicians, practices, hospitals, or other organizations). Debate continues over whether accounting for social risk would mitigate inappropriate penalties or would establish lower standards of care for disadvantaged patients if they are served by lower-quality providers. Objectives: To assess changes in hospital performance on readmission rates after adjusting for additional clinical and social patient characteristics by using methods that distinguish the association between patient characteristics and readmission from between-hospital differences in quality. Design, setting, and participants: Using Medicare claims for admissions in 2013 through 2014 and linked US Census data, we assessed several clinical and social characteristics of patients that are not currently used for risk adjustment in the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program. We compared hospital readmission rates with and without adjustment for these additional characteristics, using only the average within-hospital associations between patient characteristics and readmission as the basis for adjustment, thereby appropriately excluding hospitals' distinct contributions to readmission from the adjustment. Main outcomes and measures: All-cause readmission within 30 days of discharge. Results: The study sample consisted of 1 169 014 index admissions among 1 003 664 unique Medicare beneficiaries (41.5% men; mean [SD] age, 79.9 [8.3] years) in 2215 hospitals. Compared with adjustment for patient characteristics currently implemented by Medicare, adjustment for the additional characteristics reduced overall variation in hospital readmission rates by 9.6%, changed rates upward or downward by 0.37 to 0.72 percentage points for the 10% of hospitals most affected by the additional adjustments (±30.3% to ±58.9% of the hospital-level standard deviation), and would be expected to reduce penalties (in relative terms) by 52%, 46%, and 41% for hospitals with the largest 1%, 5%, and 10% of penalty reductions, respectively. The additional adjustments reduced the mean difference in readmission rates between hospitals in the top and bottom quintiles of high-risk patients by 0.53 percentage points (95% CI, 0.50-0.55; P < .001), or 54% of the difference estimated with CMS adjustments alone. Both clinical and social characteristics contributed to these reductions, and these reductions were considerably greater for conditions targeted by the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program. Adjustment for social characteristics resulted in greater changes in rates of readmission or death than in rates of readmission alone. Conclusions and relevance: Hospitals serving higher-risk patients may be penalized substantially because of the patients they serve rather than their quality of care. Adjusting solely for within-hospital associations may allow adjustment for additional patient characteristics to mitigate unintended consequences of pay for performance without holding hospitals to different standards because of the patients they serve.

Self-reporting Medicare and Medicaid overpayments

Don't let your revenue be part of the $4.9 billion returned to taxpayers!

Unraveling Medicare and Medicaid Prescription Drug Fraud and Abuse

Addressing medical coding and billing part II: a strategy for achieving compliance. A risk management approach for reducing coding and billing errors

Research on the risk governance of fraudulent reimbursement of patient consultation fees

Looking askance. Do you need to audit your payments?

Deterrence effects of antifraud and abuse enforcement in health care

Oversight overload: harried hospitals say the growing number of billing audits they face could actually increase costs

Navigating payment pitfalls in managed care

Catch Me If You Can: Combatting Fraud in Artificial Currency Based Government Benefits Programs

Medicare, Medicaid, and Maternal and Child Health Services Block Grant programs; civil money penalties and assessments for false or improper claims--Department of Health and Human Services. Notice of proposed rulemaking

Recent hospital charity care controversies highlight ambiguities and outdated features of government regulations

MONITORING FOR WASTE: EVIDENCE FROM MEDICARE AUDITS

Are you of good report?

Impact of fraudulent claims on health care costs

Finance issue brief: health care claims payment: prompt payment: year end report-2003

Hospitals Pay Penalties of 1.2bn for "too Many" Admissions and "too Early" Discharges

Health care programs: fraud and abuse; revised OIG civil money penalties resulting from public law 104-191. Office of Inspector General (OIG), HHS. Final rule

Best practice in unbilled account management: one medical center's story

Assessment of the Effect of Adjustment for Patient Characteristics on Hospital Readmission Rates: Implications for Pay for Performance

Lessons from the 'legitimate' misuse of Medicare Benefits Schedule Item 45503