Quality of Care for Hospitalized Depressed Elderly Patients Before and After Implementation of the Medicare Prospective Payment System

Published In: American Journal of Psychiatry, v. 150, no. 12, Dec. 1993, p. 1799-1805

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 1993

by Kenneth B. Wells, William H. Rogers, Lois M. Davis, Katherine L. Kahn, Grayson Norquist, Emmett B. Keeler, Jacqueline Kosecoff, Robert H. Brook

Read More

Access further information on this document at ajp.psychiatryonline.org

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

OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluated the impact of Medicare's Prospective Payment System on aspects of quality of care and outcomes for depressed elderly inpatients in acute-care general medical hospitals. METHOD: The depressed elderly inpatients (N = 2,746) were hospitalized in 297 acute-care general medical hospitals. The authors used a retrospective before-and-after design, controlling for differences over time in sickness at admission. Quality of care and outcomes were assessed through clinical review of explicit and implicit information in the medical records; secondary data sources provided information on postdischarge outcomes. RESULTS: After implementation of the prospective payment system 1) a higher percentage of patients had clinically appropriate acute-care admissions; 2) the initial assessment of psychological status by the treating provider was more complete; 3) the quality of psychotropic medication management, as rated by the study psychiatrists, improved; 4) the rates of any inpatient medical or psychiatric complication, of discharge to another hospital or a nursing home, and of inpatient readmission declined; and 5) there was no marked change in the percentage of patients rated by study clinicians as having acceptable overall clinical status at discharge or the rate of mortality 1 year after admission. CONCLUSIONS: After the implementation of the Medicare Prospective Payment System, the quality of care for depressed elderly inpatients improved and there was no marked increase in adverse clinical outcomes. Despite these gains, after implementation the quality of care was moderate at best and over one-third of the patients had unacceptable clinical status at discharge.

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.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.

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.