Table 3.
Measure | Average Treatment Effect [95% Confidence Interval] | Standard Error | Percent Change |
---|---|---|---|
Cost | |||
Total 60‐day Medicare Spending ($) | −1,486.27*** [−2,385.22, −587..32] | 458.65 | −11.66 |
Utilization | |||
30‐Day Inpatient Readmissions | −0.89 [−3.12, 1.34] | 1.14 | −4.29% |
60‐Day Inpatient Readmissions | −2.14* [−4.65, 0.37] | 1.28 | −7.05% |
30‐Day Emergency Department Visits | 0.21 [−2.26, 2.68] | 1.26 | 0.60% |
60‐Day Emergency Department Visits | −0.54 [−3.23, 2.15] | 1.37 | −1.46% |
Length of Stay (days) | −0.08 [−0.51, 0.35] | 0.22 | −0.66% |
Discharge Destination | |||
Discharge Home | 0.19 [−2.38, 2.76] | 1.31 | 0.41% |
Home Health | 4.85*** [2.40, 7.30] | 1.25 | 22.53% |
Institutional Postacute Care | −6.90*** [−8.74, −5.06] | 0.94 | −30.98% |
Other | 1.86** [0.15, 3.57] | 0.87 | 19.50% |
Notes: 95% confidence interval reported in brackets.
Changes in cost estimated using linear regression; those in utilization rates were estimated using binary logistic regression. Changes in length of stay estimated using a negative binomial regression model. Discharge destination changes estimated using a multinomial logistic regression model. Utilization and discharge destination results presented as estimated average treatment effects (ATE) rather than coefficient estimates because regression models are nonlinear. The ATE reflects the change in outcomes for episodes of care meeting the intent‐to‐treat criteria after the start of the tele‐ICU program, relative to the change that would have occurred in the absence of the two interventions.
Changes in spending reported in dollar terms, changes in LOS reported in days, and all other measures as percentage point changes. All inferences are based on Huber–White robust standard errors.
*p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < 0.01.