Perceptions of inpatient rehabilitation changes after the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service 2010 regulatory updates contrasted with actual performance

Abstract

Objectives: To compare and contrast subjective perceptions with objective compliance of the impact of the 2010 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service updates of the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual.

Design or setting: Cross-sectional survey.

Participants and methods: An electronic survey was sent by the Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation to all enrolled inpatient rehabilitation facility subscribers (n = 817). The survey was sent April 15, 2011, and responses were tabulated if they were received by May 15, 2011.

Main outcome measurements: Comparing and contrasting of the subjective perception to objective evaluation and/or compliance with the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual on case mix index, length of stay, admissions by diagnostic category as well as perception of preadmission screening, postadmission evaluation, plan of care, and interdisciplinary conferencing.

Results: Twenty-five percent of the 817 facilities responded, for a total of 209 responses. Complete data were present in 148 of the respondents. For most diagnostic categories, perception of change did not mirror reality of change; neither did the perception between change in case mix index and length of stay. Perception did match reality in stroke and multiple trauma cases; respondents perceived an increase in admissions for the 2 impairments, and there was an overall increase in reality.

Conclusion: Comparison with actual data identified that gaps exist between diagnostic category perceptions and actual diagnostic category admission performance. Regulations such as the 75%-60% rule and audit focus on non-neurologic conditions as well as actual inpatient rehabilitation facility program payment reports may have influenced respondents perceptions to change associated with the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual modifications. This disparity between perception and actual data may have implications for programmatic planning, forecasting, and resource allocation.