Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2020 Jun;8(6):481-488.
doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2019.12.012. Epub 2020 May 6.

Assessment of HF Outcomes Using a Claims-Based Frailty Index

Affiliations
Free article
Multicenter Study

Assessment of HF Outcomes Using a Claims-Based Frailty Index

Sukruth A Shashikumar et al. JACC Heart Fail. 2020 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Objectives: This study used a claims-based frailty index to investigate outcomes of frail patients with heart failure (HF).

Background: Medicare value-based payment programs financially reward and penalize hospitals based on HF patients' outcomes. Although programs adjust risks for comorbidities, they do not adjust for frailty. Hospitals caring for high proportions of frail patients may be unfairly penalized. Understanding frail HF patients' outcomes may allow improved risk adjustment and more equitable assessment of health care systems.

Methods: Adapting a claims-based frailty index, the study assigned a frailty score to each adult in the National in-patient Sample (NIS) from 2012 through September 2015 with a primary diagnosis of HF and dichotomized frailty by using a cutoff value established in the general NIS population. Multivariate regression models were estimated, controlling for comorbidities and hospital characteristics, to investigate relationships between frailty and outcomes.

Results: Of 732,932 patients, 369,298 were frail. Frail patients were more likely than nonfrail patients to die during hospital stay (3.57% vs. 2.37%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.61 to 1.72; p < 0.001); were less likely to be discharged to home (66.5% vs. 79.3%, respectively; aOR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.58; p < 0.001); were hospitalized for more days (5.89 vs. 4.63 days, respectively; adjusted coefficient: 0.21 days; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.22; p < 0.001); and incurred higher charges ($47,651 vs. $40,173, respectively; adjusted difference = $9,006; 95% CI: $8,596 to $9,416; p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Frail patients with HF had significantly poorer outcomes than nonfrail patients after accounting for comorbidities. Clinicians should screen for frailty to identify high-risk patients who could benefit from targeted intervention. Policymakers should perform risk adjustments for frailty for more equitable quality measurement and financial incentive allocation.

Keywords: HF; claims-based frailty index; costs; frailty; health policy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms