@article{11828, author = {Mayar Al Mohajer and Keith A. Joiner and David E. Nix}, title = {Are Teaching Hospitals Treated Fairly in the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program?}, abstract = {

PURPOSE: To identify the factors associated with total Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) score and with receiving a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) penalty (1% reduction in payment to those hospitals in the lowest-performing quartile of HACRP scores) for fiscal years (FYs) 2015-2017 with a particular focus on trends over this period.

METHOD: The authors evaluated the following variables: (1) type of hospital (teaching vs. nonteaching); (2) disproportionate patient percentage; (3) case mix index (CMI); (4) number of staffed beds; (5) length of stay (LOS); (6) gross patient revenue; and (7) region, using data from CMS and the American Hospital Directory. They conducted multivariate linear and logistic regressions.

RESULTS: A total of 2,249 hospitals were included. The mean total HACRP scores across hospitals for FY15, FY16, and FY17 were 5.38, 5.35, and 5.18, respectively. In FY15, 21.2% (476/2,249) of hospitals received a penalty compared with 22.6% (508/2,249) in FY16 and 31.3% (704/2,249) in FY17 (P < .001). The logistic regression model showed that teaching hospitals, larger hospitals (> 400 beds), hospitals with high CMI or long LOS, and hospitals in the Northeast and Western United States were more likely to receive a penalty. Teaching hospitals and larger hospitals did not improve their scores over time compared with nonteaching and small hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS: A reevaluation of the scoring methodology for the HACRP is needed. CMS could stratify hospitals into homogeneous categories and apply penalties to those that have the worst scores in each category.

}, year = {2018}, journal = {Acad Med}, volume = {93}, pages = {1827-1832}, month = {12/2018}, issn = {1938-808X}, doi = {10.1097/ACM.0000000000002399}, language = {eng}, }