Person:

Lee, Grace

Background In October 2008, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) discontinued additional payments for certain hospital-acquired conditions that were deemed preventable. The effect of this policy on rates of health care–associated infections is unknown. Methods Using a quasi-experimental design with interrupted time series with comparison series, we examined changes in trends of two health care–associated infections that were targeted by the CMS policy (central catheter–associated bloodstream infections and catheter-associated urinary tract infections) as compared with an outcome that was not targeted by the policy (ventilator-associated pneumonia). Hospitals participating in the National Healthcare Safety Network and reporting data on at least one health care–associated infection before the onset of the policy were eligible to participate. Data from January 2006 through March 2011 were included. We used regression models to measure the effect of the policy on changes in infection rates, adjusting for baseline trends. Results A total of 398 hospitals or health systems contributed 14,817 to 28,339 hospital unit– months, depending on the type of infection. We observed decreasing secular trends for both targeted and nontargeted infections long before the policy was implemented. There were no significant changes in quarterly rates of central catheter– associated bloodstream infections (incidence-rate ratio in the postimplementation vs. preimplementation period, 1.00; P=0.97), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (incidence-rate ratio, 1.03; P=0.08), or ventilator-associated pneumonia (incidence-rate ratio, 0.99; P=0.52) after the policy implementation. Our findings did not differ for hospitals in states without mandatory reporting, nor did it differ according to the quartile of percentage of Medicare admissions or hospital size, type of ownership, or teaching status. Conclusions We found no evidence that the 2008 CMS policy to reduce payments for central catheter–associated bloodstream infections and catheter-associated urinary tract infections had any measurable effect on infection rates in U.S. hospitals.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented a policy in October 2008 to eliminate additional Medicare payment for mediastinitis following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. To evaluate the impact of this policy on mediastinitis rates, using Medicare claims and National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) prospective surveillance data. We used an interrupted time series design to compare mediastinitis rates before and after the policy, adjusted for secular trends. Billing rates came from Medicare inpatient claims following 638,761 CABG procedures in 1,234 US hospitals (January 2006-September 2010). Prospective surveillance rates came from 151 NHSN hospitals in 29 states performing 94,739 CABG procedures (January 2007-September 2010). Logistic regression mixed-effects models estimated trends for mediastinitis rates. We found a sudden drop in coding for index admission mediastinitis at the time of policy implementation (odds ratio, 0.36 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.23-0.57]) and a decreasing trend in coding for index admission mediastinitis in the postintervention period compared with the preintervention period (ratio of slopes, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.74-0.95]). However, we saw no impact of the policy on infection rates as measured using NHSN data. Our results were not affected by changes in patient risk over time, heterogeneity in hospital demographics, or timing of hospital participation in NHSN. The CMS policy of withholding additional Medicare payment for mediastinitis on the basis of claims-based evidence of infection was associated with changes in coding for infections but not with changes in actual infection rates during the first 2 years after policy implementation.

Policymakers may wish to align healthcare payment and quality of care while minimizing unintended consequences, particularly for safety net hospitals. To determine whether the 2008 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Conditions policy had a differential impact on targeted healthcare-associated infection rates in safety net compared with non–safety net hospitals. Interrupted time-series design. Nonfederal acute care hospitals that reported central line–associated bloodstream infection and ventilator-associated pneumonia rates to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Health Safety Network from July 1, 2007, through December 31, 2013. We did not observe changes in the slope of targeted infection rates in the postpolicy period compared with the prepolicy period for either safety net (postpolicy vs prepolicy ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.84–1.09]) or non–safety net (0.99 [0.90–1.10]) hospitals. Controlling for prepolicy secular trends, we did not detect differences in an immediate change at the time of the policy between safety net and non–safety net hospitals (P for 2-way interaction, .87). The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Conditions policy did not have an impact, either positive or negative, on already declining rates of central line–associated bloodstream infection in safety net or non–safety net hospitals. Continued evaluations of the broad impact of payment policies on safety net hospitals will remain important as the use of financial incentives and penalties continues to expand in the United States.

To the Editor We read with interest the article by Waters et al1 because we believe it is vital to evaluate whether the actual effect of payment policies matches their intended effect. The authors contribute unique information about the results of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospital-Acquired Conditions Present on Admission Indicator (HAC POA) on pressure ulcers and injurious falls, using data from the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators. However, their findings contradict those of our previously published study evaluating the impact of the HAC POA program on rates of central line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs).2 We continue this important conversation for the benefit of patients, clinicians, hospital leadership, and policymakers, and we raise the following key concerns with the goal of increasing transparency and ensuring that conclusions about the effect of the HAC POA program are robust.