Changes in Sickness at Admission Following the Introduction of the Prospective Payment System

Published in: JAMA, Journal of the American Medical Association, v. 264, no. 15, Oct. 17, 1990, p. 1962-1968

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 1990

by Emmett B. Keeler, Katherine L. Kahn, David Draper, Marjorie J. Sherwood, Lisa V. Rubenstein, Ellen J. Reinisch, Jacqueline Kosecoff, Robert H. Brook

Read More

Access further information on this document at jama.ama-assn.org

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

The authors developed disease-specific measures of sickness at admission based on medical record data to study mortality of Medicare patients with one of five conditions (congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, pneumonia, and hip fracture). They collected an average of 73 sickness variables per disease, but the final sickness-at-admission scales use, on average, 19 variables. These scales are publicly available, and explain 25% of the variance in 30-day postadmission mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, or cerebrovascular accident. Sickness at admission increased following the introduction of the prospective payment system (PPS). For the five diseases combined, the 30-day mortality to be expected because of sickness at admission was 1.0% higher in the 1985-1986 period than in the 1981-1982 period (16.4% vs. 15.4%), and the expected 180-day mortality was 1.6% higher (30.1% vs. 28.5%). Studies of the effects of PPS on mortality must take this increase in sickness at admission into account.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.