Assessing the Validity of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Measure in Identifying Potentially Preventable Emergency Department Visits by Patients With Cancer.
Amir Alishahi TabrizKea TurnerHoma HematiChristopher W BaughJennifer Elston LafataPublished in: JCO oncology practice (2024)
The CMS approach to identifying PPEDVs has limitations. First, it may overcount preventable visits by including high-urgency or hospitalization-requiring cases. Second, relying on final diagnoses for retrospective preventability judgment can be misleading as they may not reflect the initial reason for the visit. In addition, differentiating causes for ED visits in patients with cancer undergoing various treatments is challenging as the approach does not distinguish between chemotherapy-related complications and others. Identification inconsistencies arise because of varying coding practices and chosen preventable conditions, lacking consensus and alignment with specific hospital or patient needs. Finally, the model fails to consider crucial nonclinical factors like social support, economic barriers, and alternative care access, potentially unfairly penalizing hospitals serving underserved populations.
Keyphrases
- adverse drug
- emergency department
- social support
- healthcare
- affordable care act
- depressive symptoms
- primary care
- electronic health record
- health insurance
- palliative care
- cross sectional
- magnetic resonance
- radiation therapy
- locally advanced
- clinical practice
- squamous cell carcinoma
- bioinformatics analysis
- acute care
- life cycle