Key result
Pacemaker implantation during TAVR linked to ~$5,100 higher 1-year Medicare reimbursement and longer stays.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to report 12-month post-TAVR resource utilization and compare outcomes between Medicare Beneficiaries who did or did not receive a pacemaker implantation during their index hospitalization.
Does permanent pacemaker implantation during index TAVR hospitalization increase 12-month healthcare resource utilization in Medicare beneficiaries?
Cohort (n=15,533)
Yes
Does permanent pacemaker implantation during index TAVR hospitalization increase 12-month healthcare resource utilization in Medicare beneficiaries?
Mean Difference: 5132 (95% CI 3995–6270)
Absolute Event Rate: 59756% vs 54019%
p-value: p=<0.001
Pacemaker implantation following TAVR introduces significantly higher healthcare costs and longer cumulative hospital stays over a 12-month period, which has meaningful implications for providers operating under bundled payment models.
PPM during TAVR was associated with higher 12-month costs and LOS; leaves open whether implantation drives resource use or marks sicker patients.
Purpose: This study reports resource utilization during a Medicare Beneficiary’s (MBs) Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) index hospitalization and all subsequent encounters for 12 months and compares data between MBs who did or did not receive a pacemaker implantation (PPM) during their index hospitalization. Method: This retrospective study examined Medicare hospital claims from January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015. 15,533 MBs who survived for 365 days were studied. Information from all encounters during the study period was combined to compare hospital resource utilization and outcomes. Results: 14.8% of MBs had a PPM during the index hospitalization. 46.0% of MBs had at least one readmission to a hospital during the 365-day follow-up period. 54.6% of MB’s first hospital readmission occurred within 90 days of their TAVR discharge date. Average total Medicare reimbursement for all hospitalizations was $60,638 ± $28,974 associated with average total hospital length of stay of 11.2 ± 11.7 days. After adjusting for demographics and 47 comorbid conditions, MBs receiving a PPM during the index TAVR had significantly higher estimated Medicare reimbursement ($5,132) and longer total length of stay (1.8 days) for the entire study period than MBs not receiving a PPM. Conclusion: Total Medicare reimbursement and hospital LOS were significantly higher among MBs that had a PPM implantation during their index admission; however, there were no significant differences in readmission rates, readmission length of stay, or days to first readmission during the follow-up period between the two study cohorts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Culler et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Severe aortic stenosis post-TAVR (n=15,533). Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPM) vs. No pacemaker implantation during index hospitalization was evaluated on Total Medicare reimbursement for the entire 12-month episode of care (MD $5,132 (risk-adjusted), 95% CI 3995-6270, p=<0.001). Pacemaker implantation during an index TAVR hospitalization significantly increased median total Medicare reimbursement by an adjusted $5,132 and total length of stay by 1.84 days over a 12-month episode of care.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: