Do elderly Medicaid patients experience reduced access to nursing home care?

This paper uses data from the National Long-Term Care Survey and the Area Resources File to analyze the problem of diminished access to nursing home care for elderly Medicaid patients. Using a proxy for the length of time on a waiting list before nursing home entry as my measure of access, I find evidence suggesting that nursing home operators in some areas preferentially admit private patients. Waitlisting of Medicaid patients appears to be a problem mainly in counties in which a high proportion of potential nursing home patients are private and counties in which bed supply is low.     

Better off at home? Effects of nursing home eligibility on costs,hospitalizations and survival

Encouraging and helping elderly to postpone a nursing home admission appears to be a win-win that keeps long-term care spending in check and is in line with the target population’s preferences, but there is little evidence about its effects. We study the causal impact of nursing home admission eligibility using Dutch administrative data and exploiting variation between randomly assigned assessors in their tendency to grant eligibility for a nursing home admission. We find a drop in medical care use when eligibility is granted, especially in hospital admissions, while total healthcare spending is unaffected. This suggests that postponing an admission may not always be a win-win after all.     

Do characteristics associated with nursing home residents vary by race/ethnicity?

This study identifies differences in the predisposing, enabling, and need characteristics of racial/ethnic minorities and non-Hispanic white men and women upon nursing home admission. The data come from the 1999 National Nursing Home Survey of Current Residents and contain 3,798 women of color, 3,787 men of color, 18,719 non-Hispanic white men, and 36,900 non-Hispanic white women. We estimated prevalence differences and 95% confidence intervals for the absolute differences in prevalence. Women of color in nursing homes are more likely than non-Hispanic white women in nursing homes to be bedfast and require assistance with dressing and money management. Men of color in nursing homes are more likely than non-Hispanic white men in nursing homes to require assistance with eating, care of possessions, managing money, securing personal items, and using the telephone. The overall finding suggests that people of color in nursing homes have greater impairments than non-Hispanic whites in nursing homes, and that men of color in nursing homes have greater impairment than any other race or gender categories.     

Do hospital mergers reduce costs?

Proponents of hospital consolidation claim that mergers lead to significant cost savings, but there is little systematic evidence backing these claims. For a large sample of hospital mergers between 2000 and 2010, I estimate difference-in-differences models that compare cost trends at acquired hospitals to cost trends at hospitals whose ownership did not change. I find evidence of economically and statistically significant cost reductions at acquired hospitals. On average, acquired hospitals realize cost savings between 4 and 7 percent in the years following the acquisition. These results are robust to a variety of different control strategies, and do not appear to be easily explained by post-merger changes in service and/or patient mix. I then explore several extensions of the results to examine (a) whether the acquiring hospital/system realizes cost savings post-merger and (b) if cost savings depend on the size of the acquirer and/or the geographic overlap of the merging hospitals.     

How well trained are nursing home administrators?

Nursing home administrators represent wide variations in academic training. General education levels do not seem to affect administrative preparation in key domains of practice--specific academic fields of study are more relevant. Hence, sole emphasis on higher educational requirements for licensure appears to be a misdirected strategy for improving quality of care and enhancing management efficiencies in nursing homes. Educational paradigms studied have strengths and weakness in furnishing various job skills. These results are helpful in defining strategic actions for addressing both current deficiencies and future training needs. A specialized long-term care model that incorporates appropriate clinical and business skills is recommended. The roles of continuing education and executive educational offerings also need streamlining. These initiatives would require a joint effort from policymakers, academicians, and practitioners.     

Is higher nursing home quality more costly?

Widespread issues regarding quality in nursing homes call for an improved understanding of the relationship with costs. This relationship may differ in European countries, where care is mainly delivered by nonprofit providers. In accordance with the economic theory of production, we estimate a total cost function for nursing home services using data from 45 nursing homes in Switzerland between 2006 and 2010. Quality is measured by means of clinical indicators regarding process and outcome derived from the minimum data set. We consider both composite and single quality indicators. Contrary to most previous studies, we use panel data and control for omitted variables bias. This allows us to capture features specific to nursing homes that may explain differences in structural quality or cost levels. Additional analysis is provided to address simultaneity bias using an instrumental variable approach. We find evidence that poor levels of quality regarding outcome, as measured by the prevalence of severe pain and weight loss, lead to higher costs. This may have important implications for the design of payment schemes for nursing homes.     

Do HEDIS measures reflect cost-effective practices?

PURPOSE: Whether the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) performance measures for managed care plans encourage a cost-effective use of society's resources has not been quantified. Our study objectives were to examine the cost-effectiveness evidence for the clinical practices underlying HEDIS 2000 measures and to develop a list of practices not reflected in HEDIS that have evidence of cost effectiveness. DATA SOURCES: Two databases of economic evaluations (Harvard School of Public Health Cost-Utility Registry and the Health Economics Evaluation Database) and two published lists of cost-effectiveness ratios in health and medicine. STUDY SELECTION: For each of the 15 "effectiveness of care" measures in HEDIS 2000, we searched the data through 1998 for cost-effectiveness ratios of similar interventions and target populations. We also searched for important interventions with evidence of cost-effectiveness (<$20,000 per life-year [LY] or quality-adjusted life year [QALY] gained), which are not included in HEDIS. All ratios were standardized to 1998 dollars. The data were collected and analyzed during fall 2000 to summer 2001. DATA EXTRACTION: Cost-effectiveness ratios reporting outcomes in terms of cost/LY or cost/QALY gained were included if they matched the intervention and population covered by the HEDIS measure. DATA SYNTHESIS: Evidence was available for 11 of the 15 HEDIS measures. Cost-effectiveness ranges from cost saving to $660,000/LY gained. There are numerous non-HEDIS interventions with some evidence of cost effectiveness, particularly interventions to promote healthy behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: HEDIS measures generally reflect cost-effective practices; however, in a number of cases, practices may not be cost effective for certain subgroups. Data quality and availability as well as study perspective remain key challenges in judging cost effectiveness. Opportunities exist to refine existing measures and to develop additional measures, which may promote a more efficient use of societal resources, although more research is needed on whether these measures would also satisfy other desirable attributes of HEDIS.     

Do financial incentives influence the hospitalization rate of nursing home residents? Evidence from Germany

Efficient health‐care provision for nursing home residents is a concern in many OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries. This paper analyzes whether nursing homes respond to financial incentives when deciding whether to hospitalize their residents. In Germany, reimbursements for nursing homes are reduced after a defined number of days when a resident stays in a hospital instead of a nursing home. As a result of a federal law introduced in 2008, some German states had to change the point at which reimbursements to nursing homes are reduced so that reductions are made from Day 4 instead of Day 1 of a resident's absence. This exogenously raised an incentive for the nursing homes affected to hospitalize residents especially for an expected short‐term stay. This analysis exploits the introduction of the law in a difference‐in‐difference approach, using market‐wide German‐DRG files covering all hospital patients discharged from hospitals to nursing homes from 2007 to 2011. The results suggest an increase of approximately 11% in short‐term hospital stays as a consequence of the longer reimbursement period introduced by the law.     

Can family caregiving substitute for nursing home care?

Informal care should be a substitute for nursing homes but empirical evidence often suggests the opposite. This may be because informal care receipt is positively correlated with unobserved negative health characteristics. We exploit variation in children's characteristics as instruments for informal care to provide Two-Stage Least Squares (TSLS) estimates of nursing home use among a sample of 6855 individuals from the 1993-2000 waves of the AHEAD survey. While OLS results suggest informal care is associated with greater future nursing home risk, TSLS estimates show that receipt of informal care statistically and substantially reduces the risk of nursing home entry. This finding has implications for Medicaid and private long-term care insurance markets.     

Do star ratings really reflect hospital performance?

The publication of performance ratings for NHS Trusts (star ratings) is an important part of NHS policy. There are significant benefits to a Trust in being awarded the top rating of three stars. The methodology for awarding stars to acute hospitals is explained. The most significant areas of performance in determining a hospital's star rating are identified. The Department of Health claimed that performance in 2002 was better than in 2001, against standards that are getting tougher. This claim is assessed but no clear evidence is found to substantiate it. An alternative performance rating system using the same data is developed and compared with the official version to illustrate the importance of methodology--this system used only the outcome measures of hospital services included within the star ratings system, and not process measures. Only 41 per cent of hospitals would have received the same number of stars as their official rating. Some implications of the system of performance ratings are discussed.     

Do clinical practice guidelines reflect research evidence?

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether existing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for cholesterol testing reflect research evidence and hence may control or reduce costs while maintaining or improving the quality of care. METHODS: A systematic search for published and unpublished cholesterol testing CPGs and independent critical appraisal of the CPGs by two researchers using a standard checklist. RESULTS: In four of the five CPGs analysed, the link between the research evidence and the recommendations was not maintained. The appraisal, local experience and the literature all suggest that panel composition is an important explanation, in that the greater the involvement of clinical experts in the development process of the CPGs, the less the recommendations reflected the research evidence. Even though their participation is important for CPG uptake, clinical expert panels appear to have difficulty limiting CPGs to research-based recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Existing cholesterol testing CPGs are unlikely to improve the quality of care while controlling or reducing costs. The problem lies not with guideline implementation but with the guidelines themselves. It is unclear how best to ensure that recommendations reflect research evidence but this is likely to require significant and progressive changes to the current guideline development process, including a redefinition of the clinical experts' role.