Factors Associated With Hospices' Nonparticipation in Medicare's Hospice Compare Public Reporting Program
- PMID: 30489545
- DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001016
Factors Associated With Hospices' Nonparticipation in Medicare's Hospice Compare Public Reporting Program
Abstract
Background: To enhance the quality of hospice care and to facilitate consumers' choices, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) began the Hospice Quality Reporting Program, in which CMS posted the quality measures of participating hospices on its reporting website, Hospice Compare. Little is known about the participation rate and the types of nonparticipating hospices.
Objective: To examine the factors associated with hospices' nonparticipation in Hospice Compare.
Research design: We analyzed data from the CMS 2016 Hospice Compare. "Nonparticipants" were those who did not submit any quality measure. With the data of the Provider of Service file, the Healthcare Cost Report Information System, and the Area Health Resources File, multivariate logistic regressions estimated the association between nonparticipants and hospice and market characteristics, including ownership, size, nurse staffing ratio, and market competition intensity.
Results: Among the 4123 certified hospices subject to penalty from nonparticipation, 259 did not participate in Hospice Compare. California, New Mexico, Texas, and Wyoming had participation rates lower than 80%. Hospices that were for-profit, had no accreditation, had few nurses per patient day, provided no inpatient care, and were located in competitive markets were less likely to participate than other hospices.
Conclusions: Hospice Compare successfully motivated hospice in participating in the quality report program in most of states. For-profit hospices, hospices with less quality, and hospices located in competitive markets were less likely to participate. Further research is warranted to examine the quality of these nonparticipants, especially in the 4 states with a lower participation rate.
Similar articles
-
National hospice survey results: for-profit status, community engagement, and service.JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Apr;174(4):500-6. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.3. JAMA Intern Med. 2014. PMID: 24567076 Free PMC article.
-
Have Hospice Costs Increased After Implementation of the Hospice Quality-Reporting Program?J Pain Symptom Manage. 2019 Jul;58(1):48-55.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2019.03.013. Epub 2019 Apr 8. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2019. PMID: 30974235 Free PMC article.
-
US hospice industry experienced considerable turbulence from changes in ownership, growth, and shift to for-profit status.Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Jun;31(6):1286-93. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1247. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012. PMID: 22665841 Free PMC article.
-
Hispanic Hospice Utilization: Integrative Review and Meta-analysis.J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2019;30(2):468-494. doi: 10.1353/hpu.2019.0042. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2019. PMID: 31130531
-
'I'm not that sick!' Overcoming the barriers to hospice discussions.Cleve Clin J Med. 2006 Jun;73(6):517, 520-2, 524. doi: 10.3949/ccjm.73.6.517. Cleve Clin J Med. 2006. PMID: 16784151 Review.
Cited by
-
Access to High-Quality Hospice Care in a For-Profit World.Oncologist. 2023 Sep 7;28(9):743-745. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyad205. Oncologist. 2023. PMID: 37487057 Free PMC article.
-
In Search of Hospice Information: Consumer Information Available on Hospice Compare and Yelp.Palliat Med Rep. 2020 Apr 30;1(1):18-24. doi: 10.1089/pmr.2020.0022. eCollection 2020. Palliat Med Rep. 2020. PMID: 34223451 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical