Medicare post-acute care episodes and payment bundling.

Medicare & medicaid research review Pub Date : 2014-01-24 eCollection Date: 2014-01-01 DOI:10.5600/mmrr.004.01.b02
Melissa Morley, Susan Bogasky, Barbara Gage, Shannon Flood, Melvin J Ingber
{"title":"Medicare post-acute care episodes and payment bundling.","authors":"Melissa Morley,&nbsp;Susan Bogasky,&nbsp;Barbara Gage,&nbsp;Shannon Flood,&nbsp;Melvin J Ingber","doi":"10.5600/mmrr.004.01.b02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this paper is to examine service use in an episode of acute and post-acute care (PAC) under alternative episode definitions and to look at geographic differences in episode payments.</p><p><strong>Data and methods: </strong>The data source for these analyses was a Medicare claims file for 30 percent of beneficiaries with an acute hospital initiated episode in 2008 (N = 1,705,794, of which 38.7 percent went on to use PAC). Fixed length episodes of 30, 60, and 90 days were examined. Analyses examined differences in definitions allowing any claim within the fixed length period to be part of the episode versus prorating a claim extending past the episode endpoint. Readmissions were also examined as an episode endpoint. Payments were standardized to allow for comparison of episode payments per acute hospital discharge or PAC user across states.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results of these analyses provide information on the composition of service use under different episode definitions and highlight considerations for providers and payers testing different alternatives for bundled payment.</p>","PeriodicalId":89601,"journal":{"name":"Medicare & medicaid research review","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4053189/pdf/mmrr2014-004-01-b02.pdf","citationCount":"36","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicare & medicaid research review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5600/mmrr.004.01.b02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this paper is to examine service use in an episode of acute and post-acute care (PAC) under alternative episode definitions and to look at geographic differences in episode payments.

Data and methods: The data source for these analyses was a Medicare claims file for 30 percent of beneficiaries with an acute hospital initiated episode in 2008 (N = 1,705,794, of which 38.7 percent went on to use PAC). Fixed length episodes of 30, 60, and 90 days were examined. Analyses examined differences in definitions allowing any claim within the fixed length period to be part of the episode versus prorating a claim extending past the episode endpoint. Readmissions were also examined as an episode endpoint. Payments were standardized to allow for comparison of episode payments per acute hospital discharge or PAC user across states.

Results: The results of these analyses provide information on the composition of service use under different episode definitions and highlight considerations for providers and payers testing different alternatives for bundled payment.

Abstract Image

医疗保险后急性护理事件和支付捆绑。
背景:本文的目的是在不同的插曲定义下检查急性和急性后护理(PAC)的服务使用情况,并观察插曲支付的地理差异。数据和方法:这些分析的数据来源是2008年30%的急性住院发作受益人的医疗保险索赔文件(N = 1,705,794,其中38.7%继续使用PAC)。固定长度的发作分别为30,60和90天。分析检查了允许在固定长度期间内的任何权利要求成为事件的一部分与按比例延长超过事件终点的权利要求的定义差异。再入院也作为事件终点进行了检查。付款被标准化,以允许比较每个急性出院或跨州PAC用户的插曲付款。结果:这些分析的结果提供了不同事件定义下服务使用构成的信息,并强调了提供商和支付者在测试捆绑支付的不同替代方案时的考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信