TABLE 4.
Estimated effect of the eLTC program on service use and spending outcomes among skilled care beneficiaries
| Treatment group mean (N = 2414) | Comparison group mean (N = 4907) | Estimated effect (SE) | Percent effect | p‐value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Medicare expenditures ($ PBPM) | |||||
| Baseline year | 2810 | 2975 | |||
| Follow‐up year 1 | 2823 | 2906 | 83 (75) | 3.0% | 0.27 |
| Follow‐up year 2 | 1932 | 2126 | −29 (102) | −1.5% | 0.78 |
| Cumulative | 2493 | 2602 | 57 (74) | 2.3% | 0.44 |
| Hospital stays per 1000 beneficiaries | |||||
| Baseline year | 1472 | 1507 | |||
| Follow‐up year 1 | 567 | 617 | −15 (32) | −2.6% | 0.63 |
| Follow‐up year 2 | 705 | 738 | 2.2 (47) | 0.3% | 0.96 |
| Cumulative | 592 | 636 | −8.8 (30) | −1.5% | 0.77 |
| ED & Observation visits per 1000 beneficiaries | |||||
| Baseline year | 977 | 977 | |||
| Follow‐up year 1 | 815 | 896 | −81* (43) | −9.0% | 0.06 |
| Follow‐up year 2 | 729 | 837 | −108** (55) | −12.9% | 0.05 |
| Cumulative | 793 | 878 | −85** (40) | −9.7% | 0.03 |
| Percentage likelihood of hospital discharges with a 30‐day readmission | |||||
| Baseline year | 21 | 19 | |||
| Follow‐up year 1 | 13 | 13 | −0.52 (1.5) | −3.8% | 0.73 |
| Follow‐up year 2 | 17 | 12 | 4.7** (2.3) | 38.2% | 0.05 |
| Cumulative | 13 | 13 | 0.26 (1.5) | 2.0% | 0.86 |
Note: Estimated effect for expenditures and number of visits or stays are based on a difference‐in‐differences approach and show the regression‐adjusted change for the treatment group relative to that for the comparison group between the baseline and follow‐up periods. The estimated effect for the binary outcome of any readmission within 30 days of hospital discharge is a regression‐adjusted treatment–comparison difference based on a cross‐sectional regression that controls for a beneficiary's baseline characteristics and discharge‐level risk factors for having a readmission. The follow‐up years are beneficiary‐specific and defined relative to each beneficiary's date of enrollment. Percentage effect is relative to a counterfactual value defined as the regression‐adjusted treatment group mean minus the estimated effect.
Abbreviations: ED, emergency department; eLTC, eLongTermCare; PBPM, per beneficiary per month.
Significantly different from zero at the 0.10 level, two‐tailed test.
Significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level, two‐tailed test.