Updated on: August 24, 2017

Unexplained Variations in Patient Admissions: Part I

By
Original story posted on: August 14, 2017
There is an unexplained geographic variation in how often patients are admitted to inpatient hospital care for a given diagnosis, with significant variation identified independent of patient age, insurance coverage, or clinical severity of illness.

There is an equally important means by which to measure this variation: how often preference-sensitive procedures are performed.

The decision to perform some procedures is straightforward: for example, almost all hip fracture patients undergo surgery. For other procedures, such as spinal surgery for symptomatic spinal stenosis or elective coronary artery stenting, the intervention is one of several treatment options.

This sort of care is called preference-sensitive as the decision to undergo the procedure is dependent on choices made by patients and physicians in the face of competing sets of risks, benefits, and tradeoffs.

Taking the example of spine surgery for lumbar stenosis, looking at age-, sex-, and race-controlled data for Medicare fee-for-service patients, analysis by The Dartmouth Atlas Series has found several- fold variation across the country in how often lumbar decompression or fusion procedures are performed. Some regions have rates 4 to 10 times higher than others.

Another area of wide unexplained variation is catheter-based intervention for coronary artery disease. A study by Daniel Matlock and colleagues looked at the rates of catheter-based intervention in Medicare fee-for-service patients across 32 hospital referral regions in 12 states.

They found that urgently needed procedures such as treatment of acute coronary syndromes did not vary very much. However, elective procedures such as treatment of stable symptomatic coronary disease varied significantly.

For both angiography alone and angiography with stenting, rates of age-, sex-, race-, and income-adjusted procedure performance varied more than twofold.

Interestingly, performing the same analysis for Medicare Advantage patients demonstrated an even larger, three- to four-fold variation.

Importantly, the magnitude of variation seen in studies such as those I’ve described is felt to far exceed variation attributable to differences in severity of illness. As discussed previously for medical hospital-based decision-making, reducing this sort of variation is crucial to attempts to improve outcomes and reduce harms and costs in our healthcare system.

Among other tools, utilization of evidence-based criteria sets and procedure rate benchmarks, such as those produced by MCG, is central to this effort.
Disclaimer: Every reasonable effort was made to ensure the accuracy of this information at the time it was published. However, due to the nature of industry changes over time we cannot guarantee its validity after the year it was published.
Bill Rifkin MD, FHM, FACP

Dr. Rifkin is the managing editor and physician relations specialist at MCG. He oversees research, guideline writing, and other content development focused on acute inpatient care. Before joining MCG in 2009, he was an associate professor of clinical medicine and the director of the Internal Medicine Residency Program at Jacobi Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx. Prior to that, he was an academic hospitalist and associate residency program director at two other New York City hospitals and at the Yale Primary Care Internal Medicine Residency in New Haven, Conn. Dr. Rifkin is board-certified in internal medicine.

Related Stories

  • Things Your Mother Never Told You About HCC: Version 23
    The 2019 CMS risk adjustment model is version 23. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released, in April, the latest update to the CMS-hierarchical condition category (HCC) Risk Adjustment Model (V23).  It applies to payment year 2019.  As…
  • Random Thoughts about ICD-11
    New classification system noted for granularity. Several of my colleagues recently attended an ICD-11 presentation by Kathy Giannangelo[i] at the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) Convention & Exhibit. Kathy has been in the trenches with ICD-11’s development for some…
  • Understanding Presumptive Linkage for Code Titles “With” or “In”
    Sharing insights on assumptive coding  When I was a physician advisor, I used to offer a diabetic Charcot joint as an example of why we must be explicit with linkage. Years ago, if a provider listed diabetes mellitus and a…