Cargando…

A comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care

BACKGROUND: Methods used to categorize functional status to predict health outcomes across post-acute care settings vary significantly. OBJECTIVES: We compared three methods that categorize functional status to predict 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission across inpatient rehabilitation facilities...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Chih-Ying, Karmarkar, Amol, Kuo, Yong-Fang, Mehta, Hemalkumar B., Mallinson, Trudy, Haas, Allen, Kumar, Amit, Ottenbacher, Kenneth J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7205206/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32379765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232017
_version_ 1783530199299653632
author Li, Chih-Ying
Karmarkar, Amol
Kuo, Yong-Fang
Mehta, Hemalkumar B.
Mallinson, Trudy
Haas, Allen
Kumar, Amit
Ottenbacher, Kenneth J.
author_facet Li, Chih-Ying
Karmarkar, Amol
Kuo, Yong-Fang
Mehta, Hemalkumar B.
Mallinson, Trudy
Haas, Allen
Kumar, Amit
Ottenbacher, Kenneth J.
author_sort Li, Chih-Ying
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Methods used to categorize functional status to predict health outcomes across post-acute care settings vary significantly. OBJECTIVES: We compared three methods that categorize functional status to predict 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission across inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRF), skilled nursing facilities (SNF) and home health agencies (HHA). RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of 2013–2014 Medicare claims data (N = 740,530). Data were randomly split into two subsets using a 1:1 ratio. We used half of the cohort (development subset) to develop functional status categories for three methods, and then used the rest (testing subset) to compare outcome prediction. Three methods to generate functional categories were labeled as: Method I, percentile based on proportional distribution; Method II, percentile based on change score distribution; and Method III, functional staging categories based on Rasch person strata. We used six differentiation and classification statistics to determine the optimal method of generating functional categories. SETTING: IRF, SNF and HHA. SUBJECTS: We included 130,670 (17.7%) Medicare beneficiaries with stroke, 498,576 (67.3%) with lower extremity joint replacement and 111,284 (15.0%) with hip and femur fracture. MEASURES: Unplanned 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission. RESULTS: For all impairment conditions, Method III best predicted 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission. However, we observed overlapping confidence intervals among some comparisons of three methods. The bootstrapping of 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission predictive models showed the area under curve for Method III was statistically significantly higher than both Method I and Method II (all paired-comparisons, p<.001), using the testing sample. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, functional staging was the optimal method to generate functional status categories to predict 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission. To facilitate clinical and scientific use, we suggest the most appropriate method to categorize functional status should be based on the strengths and weaknesses of each method.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7205206
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72052062020-05-12 A comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care Li, Chih-Ying Karmarkar, Amol Kuo, Yong-Fang Mehta, Hemalkumar B. Mallinson, Trudy Haas, Allen Kumar, Amit Ottenbacher, Kenneth J. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Methods used to categorize functional status to predict health outcomes across post-acute care settings vary significantly. OBJECTIVES: We compared three methods that categorize functional status to predict 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission across inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRF), skilled nursing facilities (SNF) and home health agencies (HHA). RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of 2013–2014 Medicare claims data (N = 740,530). Data were randomly split into two subsets using a 1:1 ratio. We used half of the cohort (development subset) to develop functional status categories for three methods, and then used the rest (testing subset) to compare outcome prediction. Three methods to generate functional categories were labeled as: Method I, percentile based on proportional distribution; Method II, percentile based on change score distribution; and Method III, functional staging categories based on Rasch person strata. We used six differentiation and classification statistics to determine the optimal method of generating functional categories. SETTING: IRF, SNF and HHA. SUBJECTS: We included 130,670 (17.7%) Medicare beneficiaries with stroke, 498,576 (67.3%) with lower extremity joint replacement and 111,284 (15.0%) with hip and femur fracture. MEASURES: Unplanned 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission. RESULTS: For all impairment conditions, Method III best predicted 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission. However, we observed overlapping confidence intervals among some comparisons of three methods. The bootstrapping of 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission predictive models showed the area under curve for Method III was statistically significantly higher than both Method I and Method II (all paired-comparisons, p<.001), using the testing sample. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, functional staging was the optimal method to generate functional status categories to predict 30-day and 90-day hospital readmission. To facilitate clinical and scientific use, we suggest the most appropriate method to categorize functional status should be based on the strengths and weaknesses of each method. Public Library of Science 2020-05-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7205206/ /pubmed/32379765 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232017 Text en © 2020 Li et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Li, Chih-Ying
Karmarkar, Amol
Kuo, Yong-Fang
Mehta, Hemalkumar B.
Mallinson, Trudy
Haas, Allen
Kumar, Amit
Ottenbacher, Kenneth J.
A comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care
title A comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care
title_full A comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care
title_fullStr A comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care
title_short A comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care
title_sort comparison of three methods in categorizing functional status to predict hospital readmission across post-acute care
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7205206/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32379765
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232017
work_keys_str_mv AT lichihying acomparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT karmarkaramol acomparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT kuoyongfang acomparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT mehtahemalkumarb acomparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT mallinsontrudy acomparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT haasallen acomparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT kumaramit acomparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT ottenbacherkennethj acomparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT lichihying comparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT karmarkaramol comparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT kuoyongfang comparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT mehtahemalkumarb comparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT mallinsontrudy comparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT haasallen comparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT kumaramit comparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare
AT ottenbacherkennethj comparisonofthreemethodsincategorizingfunctionalstatustopredicthospitalreadmissionacrosspostacutecare