Should fee-for-service be for all guideline-advocated acute coronary syndrome (ACS) care? Observations from the Snapshot ACS study
Thomas G. Briffa A L , Christopher J. Hammett B , David B. Cross C , Andrew I. Macisaac D , James M. Rankin E , Neville Board F , Bridie Carr G , Karice K. Hyun H , John French I , David B. Brieger J and Derek P. Chew KA University of Western Australia, M431, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.
B Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Butterfield Terrace, Brisbane, Qld 4029, Australia. Email: Christopher.Hammett@health.qld.gov.au
C Heart Care Partners, L5, Sandford Jackson Building, 30 Chasely Street, Auchenflower, Qld 4066, Australia. Email: dbcross@heartcarepartners.com.au
D St Vincent’s Hospital Melbourne, PO Box 2900, Fitzroy, Vic. 3065, Australia. Email: andrew.macisaac@svha.org.au
E Royal Perth Hospital, Wellington Street, Perth, WA 6000, Australia. Email: James.rankin@health.wa.gov.au
F eHealth & Medication Safety, L5, 255 Elizabeth Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia. Email: neville.board@health.gov.au
G Agency for Clinical Innovation (ACI), 67 Albert Street, Sydney, NSW 2057, Australia. Email: bridie.carr@aci.health.nsw.gov.au
H The George Institute for Global Health, L10, King George V Building, 83–117 Missenden Road, Camperdown, NSW 2050, Australia. Email: khyun@georgeinstitute.org.au
I Liverpool Hospital, Elizabeth Street, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia. Email: j.french@unsw.edu.au
J Concord Hospital, Hospital Road, Concord, NSW 2139, Australia. Email: David.Brieger@sswahs.nsw.gov.au
K Flinders University and Flinders Medical Centre, Flinders Drive, Bedford Park, 5042, SA, Australia. Email: derek.chew@flinders.edu.au
L Corresponding author. Email: Tom.Briffa@uwa.edu.au
Australian Health Review 39(4) 379-386 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH14153
Submitted: 15 September 2014 Accepted: 4 February 2015 Published: 27 April 2015
Abstract
Objective The aim of the present study was to explore the association of health insurance status on the provision of guideline-advocated acute coronary syndrome (ACS) care in Australia.
Methods Consecutive hospitalisations of suspected ACS from 14 to 27 May 2012 enrolled in the Snapshot study of Australian and New Zealand patients were evaluated. Descriptive and logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association of patient risk and insurance status with the receipt of care.
Results In all, 3391 patients with suspected ACS from 247 hospitals (23 private) were enrolled in the present study. One-third of patients declared private insurance coverage; of these, 27.9% (304/1088) presented to private facilities. Compared with public patients, privately insured patients were more likely to undergo in-patient echocardiography and receive early angiography; furthermore, in those with a discharge diagnosis of ACS, there was a higher rate of revascularisation (P < 0.001). Each of these attracts potential fee-for-service. In contrast, proportionately fewer privately insured ACS patients were discharged on selected guideline therapies and were referred to a secondary prevention program (P = 0.056), neither of which directly attracts a fee. Typically, as GRACE (the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) risk score rose, so did the level of ACS care; however, propensity-adjusted analyses showed lower in-hospital adverse events among the insured group (odds ratio 0.68; 95% confidence interval 0.52–0.88; P = 0.004).
Conclusion Fee-for-service reimbursement may explain differences in the provision of selected guideline-advocated components of ACS care between privately insured and public patients.
What is known about this topic? There is variation in the pattern of acute coronary syndrome care across Australia.
What does this paper add? Clear differences in the provision of selected proven therapies for acute coronary syndrome apply independent of whether a fee is charged or not.
What are the implications for practitioners? Consideration should be given to the remuneration for proven therapies for acute coronary syndrome care in preference to those not supported by the evidence base.
Additional keywords: clinical guidelines, health services, quality of care.
References
[1] Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Australia’s health 2012. Australia’s health no. 13. Catalogue no. AUS 156. Canberra: AIHW; 2012.[2] National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission. A healthier future for all Australians: final report. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia; 2009.
[3] Duckett S. Designing incentives for good-quality hospital care. Med J Aust 2012; 196 678–9.
| Designing incentives for good-quality hospital care.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22708755PubMed |
[4] Chew DP, Aroney CN, Aylward PE, et al 2011 Addendum to the National Heart Foundation of Australia/Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) 2006. Heart Lung Circ 2011; 20 487–502.
| 21910262PubMed |
[5] ST-elevation myocardial infarction: New Zealand management guidelines, 2013. NZ Med J 2013; 126 1387
[6] New Zealand 2012 guidelines for the management of non ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. NZ Med J 2012; 125 1357
[7] Steg PG, James SK, Atar D, et al ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force on the management of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Euro Heart J 2012; 33 2569–2619.
| 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC38XhsFektbrE&md5=be2b1a96d972b8dc6937f9e345818486CAS |
[8] Hamm CW, Bassand J-P, Agewall S, et al ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Euro Heart J 2011; 32 2999–3054.
[9] O’Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD, et al 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report of the American College of cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61 e78–e140.
| 23256914PubMed |
[10] Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al 2012 ACCF/AHA Focused Update Incorporated into the ACCF/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61 e179–e347.
| 23639841PubMed |
[11] Chew DP, French J, Briffa TG, Hammett C, Ellis C, Ranasinghe I, Aliprandi-Costa B, Astley C, Turnbull F, Lefkovits J, Redfern J, Carr B, Gamble G, Lintern K, Howell T, Parker H, Tavella R, Bloomer S, Hyun K, Brieger D. Acute coronary syndrome care across Australia and New Zealand: the SNAPSHOT ACS study. Med J Aust 2013; 199 185–91.
| 23909541PubMed |
[12] Ellis C, Gamble G, Devlin G, Elliott J, Hamer A, Williams M, Matsis P, Troughton R, Ranasinghe I, French J, Brieger D, Chew DP, White H. The management of acute coronary syndrome patients across New Zealand in 2012: results of a third comprehensive nationwide audit and observations of current interventional care. N Z Med J 2013; 126 36–68.
| 24362734PubMed |
[13] Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Australian hospital statistics 2012–13. Health services series no. 54. Catalogue no. HSE 145. Canberra: AIHW; 2014.
[14] Australian Commission for Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC). Clinical Care Standards. Sydney: ACSQHC; 2013. Available at: http://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/our-work/clinical-care-standards [verified 18 July 2014].
[15] Chew DP, Junbo G, Parsonage W, Kerkar P, Sulimov VA, Horsfall M, Mattchoss S. Perceived risk of ischemic and bleeding events in acute coronary syndromes. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2013; 6 299–308.
| Perceived risk of ischemic and bleeding events in acute coronary syndromes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23652735PubMed |
[16] Patel MR, Dehmer GJ, Hirshfeld JW, Smith PK, Spertus J. ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59 857–81.
| ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22296741PubMed |
[17] Fox KA, Fitzgerald G, Puymirat E, Huang W, Carruther K, Simon T, Coste P, Monsegu J, Steg PG, Danchin N, Anderson F. Should patients with acute coronary disease be stratified for management according to their risk? Derivation, external validation and outcomes using the updated GRACE risk score. BMJ Open 2014; 4 e004425
| Should patients with acute coronary disease be stratified for management according to their risk? Derivation, external validation and outcomes using the updated GRACE risk score.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24561498PubMed |
