Are Teaching Hospitals Treated Fairly in the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program?

Mayar Al Mohajer, Keith A Joiner, David E. Nix

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To identify the factors associated with total Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) score and with receiving a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) penalty (1% reduction in payment to those hospitals in the lowest-performing quartile of HACRP scores) for fiscal years (FYs) 2015-2017 with a particular focus on trends over this period. METHOD: The authors evaluated the following variables: (1) type of hospital (teaching vs. nonteaching); (2) disproportionate patient percentage; (3) case mix index (CMI); (4) number of staffed beds; (5) length of stay (LOS); (6) gross patient revenue; and (7) region, using data from CMS and the American Hospital Directory. They conducted multivariate linear and logistic regressions. RESULTS: A total of 2,249 hospitals were included. The mean total HACRP scores across hospitals for FY15, FY16, and FY17 were 5.38, 5.35, and 5.18, respectively. In FY15, 21.2% (476/2,249) of hospitals received a penalty compared with 22.6% (508/2,249) in FY16 and 31.3% (704/2,249) in FY17 (P < .001). The logistic regression model showed that teaching hospitals, larger hospitals (> 400 beds), hospitals with high CMI or long LOS, and hospitals in the Northeast and Western United States were more likely to receive a penalty. Teaching hospitals and larger hospitals did not improve their scores over time compared with nonteaching and small hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: A reevaluation of the scoring methodology for the HACRP is needed. CMS could stratify hospitals into homogeneous categories and apply penalties to those that have the worst scores in each category.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1827-1832
Number of pages6
JournalAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges
Volume93
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2018

Fingerprint

Teaching
penalty
revenue
logistics
regression
methodology
trend

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Cite this

@article{b5fcce4ea7eb4434a200f24f9660a21a,
title = "Are Teaching Hospitals Treated Fairly in the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program?",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To identify the factors associated with total Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) score and with receiving a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) penalty (1{\%} reduction in payment to those hospitals in the lowest-performing quartile of HACRP scores) for fiscal years (FYs) 2015-2017 with a particular focus on trends over this period. METHOD: The authors evaluated the following variables: (1) type of hospital (teaching vs. nonteaching); (2) disproportionate patient percentage; (3) case mix index (CMI); (4) number of staffed beds; (5) length of stay (LOS); (6) gross patient revenue; and (7) region, using data from CMS and the American Hospital Directory. They conducted multivariate linear and logistic regressions. RESULTS: A total of 2,249 hospitals were included. The mean total HACRP scores across hospitals for FY15, FY16, and FY17 were 5.38, 5.35, and 5.18, respectively. In FY15, 21.2{\%} (476/2,249) of hospitals received a penalty compared with 22.6{\%} (508/2,249) in FY16 and 31.3{\%} (704/2,249) in FY17 (P < .001). The logistic regression model showed that teaching hospitals, larger hospitals (> 400 beds), hospitals with high CMI or long LOS, and hospitals in the Northeast and Western United States were more likely to receive a penalty. Teaching hospitals and larger hospitals did not improve their scores over time compared with nonteaching and small hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: A reevaluation of the scoring methodology for the HACRP is needed. CMS could stratify hospitals into homogeneous categories and apply penalties to those that have the worst scores in each category.",
author = "{Al Mohajer}, Mayar and Joiner, {Keith A} and Nix, {David E.}",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/ACM.0000000000002399",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "93",
pages = "1827--1832",
journal = "Academic Medicine",
issn = "1040-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are Teaching Hospitals Treated Fairly in the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program?

AU - Al Mohajer, Mayar

AU - Joiner, Keith A

AU - Nix, David E.

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - PURPOSE: To identify the factors associated with total Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) score and with receiving a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) penalty (1% reduction in payment to those hospitals in the lowest-performing quartile of HACRP scores) for fiscal years (FYs) 2015-2017 with a particular focus on trends over this period. METHOD: The authors evaluated the following variables: (1) type of hospital (teaching vs. nonteaching); (2) disproportionate patient percentage; (3) case mix index (CMI); (4) number of staffed beds; (5) length of stay (LOS); (6) gross patient revenue; and (7) region, using data from CMS and the American Hospital Directory. They conducted multivariate linear and logistic regressions. RESULTS: A total of 2,249 hospitals were included. The mean total HACRP scores across hospitals for FY15, FY16, and FY17 were 5.38, 5.35, and 5.18, respectively. In FY15, 21.2% (476/2,249) of hospitals received a penalty compared with 22.6% (508/2,249) in FY16 and 31.3% (704/2,249) in FY17 (P < .001). The logistic regression model showed that teaching hospitals, larger hospitals (> 400 beds), hospitals with high CMI or long LOS, and hospitals in the Northeast and Western United States were more likely to receive a penalty. Teaching hospitals and larger hospitals did not improve their scores over time compared with nonteaching and small hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: A reevaluation of the scoring methodology for the HACRP is needed. CMS could stratify hospitals into homogeneous categories and apply penalties to those that have the worst scores in each category.

AB - PURPOSE: To identify the factors associated with total Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) score and with receiving a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) penalty (1% reduction in payment to those hospitals in the lowest-performing quartile of HACRP scores) for fiscal years (FYs) 2015-2017 with a particular focus on trends over this period. METHOD: The authors evaluated the following variables: (1) type of hospital (teaching vs. nonteaching); (2) disproportionate patient percentage; (3) case mix index (CMI); (4) number of staffed beds; (5) length of stay (LOS); (6) gross patient revenue; and (7) region, using data from CMS and the American Hospital Directory. They conducted multivariate linear and logistic regressions. RESULTS: A total of 2,249 hospitals were included. The mean total HACRP scores across hospitals for FY15, FY16, and FY17 were 5.38, 5.35, and 5.18, respectively. In FY15, 21.2% (476/2,249) of hospitals received a penalty compared with 22.6% (508/2,249) in FY16 and 31.3% (704/2,249) in FY17 (P < .001). The logistic regression model showed that teaching hospitals, larger hospitals (> 400 beds), hospitals with high CMI or long LOS, and hospitals in the Northeast and Western United States were more likely to receive a penalty. Teaching hospitals and larger hospitals did not improve their scores over time compared with nonteaching and small hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: A reevaluation of the scoring methodology for the HACRP is needed. CMS could stratify hospitals into homogeneous categories and apply penalties to those that have the worst scores in each category.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057537248&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057537248&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002399

DO - 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002399

M3 - Article

C2 - 30095455

AN - SCOPUS:85057537248

VL - 93

SP - 1827

EP - 1832

JO - Academic Medicine

JF - Academic Medicine

SN - 1040-2446

IS - 12

ER -