Hospital Readmissions, Mortality Incentives Alarmingly Misaligned
Why does the Affordable Care Act impose much stiffer financial penalties on hospitals with higher 30-day readmission rates than for hospitals with higher 30-day mortality? Isn't preventing death, the ultimate bad outcome, much more important to incentivize?
That's the sticky question healthcare leaders are asking, which challenges the priorities and incentives set forth in the ACA. Practically speaking, the formula greatly dilutes the impact of mortality on incentive payments.
"It's like readmissions matter more than mortality, and that just seems ill-advised," says Ashish Jha, MD, a Harvard School of Public Health policy researcher and practicing internist who has been parsing the impact of Medicare's rules on hospital performance.
"I don't know any patient who would say, 'Oh, well, I'll take a higher risk of dying as long as I don't have to be readmitted,' " "It's hard to fathom that now readmissions are more important," he said in an interview.
The penalty for having higher rates of risk-adjusted readmissions starts at 1% of a hospital's Medicare DRG rates for heart failure, pneumonia, or acute myocardial infarction patient discharges as of Oct. 1, 2012 and increases to 3% in 2015.
But hospital 30-day mortality, which moves into the formula in FY 2013, is just one of more than 20 quality elements that make up the 1% to 2% of the value-based purchasing incentive payment hospitals with higher mortality will lose.
- Reform Puts Vise Grips on Physicians
- Look Beyond Nurse-Patient Ratios
- Medicare Opt-Out a Viable Physician Strategy
- Hospital Groups Back NQF Report on Patient Sociodemographics
- NPP Demand Rising Under Value-Based Care Models
- Boston Marathon Bombing Yields Lessons for Hospitals
- Providers Lag as Consumers Set Agenda
- The Flourishing Medical Tourism Business in America
- Physicians as Economic Powerhouses and Tech Laggards
- How Physicians Can Help Ease Mental Health Provider Shortages