Utilization of ACP CPT codes among high-need Medicare beneficiaries in 2017: A brief report
Authors
Reich, Amanda J.Jin, Ginger
Gupta, Avni
Kim, Dae
Lipstiz, Stuart
Prigerson, Holly G.
Tjia, Jennifer
Ladin, Keren
Halpern, Scott D.
Cooper, Zara
Weissman, Joel S.
UMass Chan Affiliations
Department of Population and Quantitative Health SciencesDocument Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2020-02-05Keywords
MedicareChronic kidney disease
Frailty
Disabilities
End of life care
Health care policy
Health services research
Verbal communication
Geriatrics
Health Communication
Health Policy
Health Services Administration
Health Services Research
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
IMPORTANCE: Medicare beneficiaries with high medical needs can benefit from Advance Care Planning (ACP). Medicare reimburses clinical providers for ACP discussions, but it is unknown whether high-need beneficiaries are receiving this service. OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of billed ACP discussions among a cohort of high-need Medicare beneficiaries with the non-high-needs Medicare population. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) claims in 2017 comparing high-need beneficiaries (seriously ill, frail, ESRD, and disabled) with non-high need beneficiaries. SETTING: Nationally representative FFS Medicare 20% sample. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries were assigned to one of the following classifications: seriously ill (65+), frail (65+), seriously ill and frail (65+); non-high need (65+); end stage renal disease (ESRD) or disabled ( < 65). All participants had data available for years 2016-2017. EXPOSURE: Receipt of a billed ACP discussion, CPT codes 99497 or 99498. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Rates of billed ACP visits were compared between high-need patients and non-high-need patients. Rates were adjusted for the 65+ population for sex, age, race/ethnicity, Charlson comorbidity index, Medicare/Medicaid dual eligibility status, and Hospital Referral Region. RESULTS: Among the 65+ groups, those most likely to have a billed ACP discussion included seriously ill and frail (5.2%), seriously ill (4.2%), and frail (3.3%). Rates remained consistent after adjusting (4.5%, 4.0%, 3.1%, respectively). Each subgroup differed significantly (p < .05) from non-high need beneficiaries (2.3%) in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Among the < 65 high need groups, the rates were 2.7% for ESRD and 1.3% for the disabled (the latter p < .05 compared with non-high needs). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: While rates of billed ACP discussions varied among patient groups with high medical needs, overall they were relatively low, even among a cohort of patients for whom ACP may be especially relevant.Source
Reich AJ, Jin G, Gupta A, Kim D, Lipstiz S, Prigerson HG, Tjia J, Ladin K, Halpern SD, Cooper Z, Weissman JS. Utilization of ACP CPT codes among high-need Medicare beneficiaries in 2017: A brief report. PLoS One. 2020 Feb 5;15(2):e0228553. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228553. PMID: 32023311; PMCID: PMC7001931. Link to article on publisher's site
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0228553Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/41355PubMed ID
32023311Related Resources
Rights
Copyright: © 2020 Reich et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Distribution License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1371/journal.pone.0228553
Scopus Count
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright: © 2020 Reich et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
A Public Health Framework for the State Mental Health Authority: A Call for Action by Massachusetts Consumers and Family MembersDelman, Jonathan (2006-01-01)During the Spring of 2006, Consumer Quality Initiatives (CQI) conducted 20 focus groups across the state, 12 with adults with mental illness, 3 with parents of youth with serious emotional disorder, 2 with youth with SED, 1 with family members of adult consumers, and 2 with youth in transition. Supported by a contract with Massachusetts Department of Mental Health (DMH), the goal was to assist DMH in framing the criteria for its upcoming reprocurement. Our findings reveal a frustration with an approach to health care delivery that focuses primarily on the provision of psychiatric care (egs, medication, therapy, hospitalization). We reviewed the focus group reports to identify the most significant themes, which clustered within eight broad categories.
-
Policy Brief: Addressing Social Determinants of Health through Community Health Workers: A Call to ActionLondon, Katharine; Damio, Grace; Ferrazo, Meredith; Perez-Escamalla, Rafael; Wiggins, Noelle (2018-01-30)This technical report was compiled by the Hispanic Health Council in partnership with Southwestern AHEC and a panel of Community Health Worker Policy Research Experts which included our Katharine London from the Center for Health Law and Economics. The report offers a number of policy recommendations for community health workers for communities that might benefit from community-based services. The report offers recommendations on; payment of community health workers; community health worker caseloads; community health worker recruitment; community health worker training; reflective and trauma-informed mentoring and supportive supervision of community health workers; integration of community health workers into care teams; documenting the effect of community heal worker services on social determination of health. The Hispanic Health Council believes a service design that effectively supports community health workers would incorporate the seven areas of policy recommendation included in this report.
-
Making the Case for Sustainable Funding for Community Health Worker Services: Talking to Payers and ProvidersLondon, Katharine (2018-01-27)In this presentation, Katharine London of the Center for Health Law and Economics makes her case for offering sustainable funding for community health worker services. Research has shown community health workers can have a distinct impact on health systems, helping them improve population health and contain costs, while also promoting health equity and community engagement. This presentation was designed to assist CHWs and other advocates in engaging with policymakers and payers to support CHW sustainability and develop a financial plan for their CHW work. It was presented as part of a CHW Sustainability event held at the Families USA’s annual conference, Health Action 2018: Staying Strong for America’s Families, in Washington, DC. See Katharine London's blog post on payment delivery methods for community health workers here.