PowerPoint Presentation · §409.44(c)(2)(F)(1,2): A clinically supportable statement why there is...
Transcript of PowerPoint Presentation · §409.44(c)(2)(F)(1,2): A clinically supportable statement why there is...
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 1
9/27/2014
Kenneth L Miller, PT, DPT, CEEAA
September 27, 2014
2
• Kenneth L Miller, PT, DPT, CEEAA serves as the Chair of the Practice Committee of the Home Health Section of the APTA and as a clinical educator for Catholic Home Care, where he provides staff development, leads the orientation and competency programs, coordinates continuing education and training promoting evidenced-based practice.
• Dr. Miller has published numerous articles in the “The Quarterly Report” publication of the Home Health Section and “GeriNotes” publication of the Section on Geriatrics on evidenced-based practice relating to bone health, heart failure, cancer, balance, dizziness and vestibular rehabilitation.
• He is a member of the Editorial Board of GeriNotes and a manuscript reviewer for JGPT.
Upon completion of this course: 1. The participant will be able to select and administer objective tests appropriate for use with the community-dwelling elderly population in the home health and outpatient physical therapy settings 2. The participant will be able to incorporate the ICF into patient assessment to identify and categorize impairments and justify care provision 3. The participant will have increased competence in the administration and interpretation of standardized objective tests 4. The participant will be able to effectively incorporate the results in goal formation and creation of the plan of care
3
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 2
9/27/2014
Welcome – Background, Pre-Test Regulations ICF
Selecting appropriate objective tests
Hands-On Lab Learn/Practice instruments
Documentation – effective care planning
Knowledge Integration - patient scenarios, documentation & goal writing. Documenting medical need and care provision justification
Conclusion - Q&A; Post-Test; Course evaluation
5
True/False. The International Classification of Function, Disability and Health (ICF) is a classification system based on the medical model of disease
True/False. Balance confidence is a metric that is predictive of fall risk
True/False. Home Health and Outpatient therapy settings require objective testing
6
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka ACA) ◦ Signed into law March 2010
◦ Value-Based Purchasing System
◦ Shift from volume-based to value based health care delivery model
Started in Hospitals now moving to Home Health
Scrutiny of Health Care Industry is ramping up ◦ Fraud, Waste and Abuse
7
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 3
9/27/2014
April 26, 2010, WSJ article, “Home Care Yields Medicare Bounty” accelerates ever increasing scrutiny in healthcare, particularly in Home Health
“Gaming” the system – 2011 U.S. Senate Report.
Nationwide therapy usage pattern shifts based on payment tiers
10 visit threshold to 6, 14, 20 visit threshold
8
The Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control program, of which OIG is a key partner, returned more than $7 for every $1 invested
Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC)
Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) Zone Program Integrity Contractor
(ZPIC) Comprehensive Error Rate Testing
(CERT)
9
Daniel R. Levinson Inspector General
July 29, 2014; U.S. Department of Justice Director of Nursing Pleads Guilty in Miami for
Role in $7 Million Health Care Fraud Scheme July 23, 2014; U.S. Department of Justice Owner and Administrator of Miami Home Health
Companies Pleads Guilty for Role in $74 Million Health Care Fraud Scheme
June 19, 2014; U.S. Department of Justice Medicare Fraud Strike Force Case
Former Owner of Physical Therapy Clinic Sentenced to Prison in Connection with Health Care Fraud Scheme
10
http://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/enforcement/criminal/index.asp
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 4
9/27/2014
The top five states (Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Texas) account for about 35 percent of all home health care episodes despite accounting for only 17 percent of beneficiaries. The utilization in these five states is 34.7 episodes per 100 FFS beneficiaries, compared with 13.7 episodes per 100 FFS beneficiaries for all other states
11
MEDPAC- Report to Congress 2013
Civil War – Lincoln Law Applicable for any claims for which money is
spent on the government’s behalf and/or any of the money is provided by the federal government ◦ This includes claims made with regards to Medicare
and Medicaid
Fraud – intent to deceive “Known or should have known” ◦ Government does not have to prove intent…but
should have known in fraud litigation
12
Home Health (Medicare Part A benefit) requires objective testing as per HH PPS Final Rule 2011 ◦ Effective 4/1/2011 ◦ Reassessment requirement @13/19/30
Outpatient Therapy (Medicare Part B benefit) requires functional reporting (G-codes) as per Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act 2012 ◦ Effective 1/1/2013 (mandatory 7/1/14) ◦ Functional Limitation Reporting
At least every 10th treatment day
13
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 5
9/27/2014
Federal Government ◦ Federal Law – HIPAA, HITECH, ACA
◦ Federal Agency – HHS, CMS, OSHA, CDC
Regulations are dynamic and change
CMS – governs Medicare
Medicare Benefits Policy Manual
Medicare Claims Processing Manual
Transmittals
Medicare Learning Network (MLN) Matters
Medicare Administrative Contractors (MAC)
National Coverage Determination (NCD)
Local Coverage Determination (LCD)
14
Moving target – rules change
Proposed rule released in spring and final rule released in fall for following year ◦ Open comment period between proposed and final
rule
Provide your input to CMS!
15
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Medicare Benefit Policy Manual (100-02) ◦ Chapter 7. Home Health Services
Medicare Claims Processing Manual (100-04) ◦ Chapter 10. Home Health Agency Billing
Transmittals
16
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 6
9/27/2014
Home Health Prospective Payment System (HH PPS 2011 Final Rule)
◦ Mandated 13th visit and 19th visit and at least every
30 day reassessments
◦ Time point requirements and content requirements
◦ Purpose is to determine the efficacy of the plan of care (POC) towards meeting the established goals
17
◦ §409.44(c)(1)(iv): Measurements which assess activities of daily living that may include but are not limited to eating, swallowing, bathing, dressing, toileting, walking, climbing stairs, or using assistive devices, and mental and cognitive factors
§409.44(c)(2)(A): Reassessment to include measurement results and corresponding effectiveness of the therapy, or lack thereof
18
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-11-17/pdf/2010-27778.pdf
Question 13: What tools can therapists use to do the objective assessments?
Answer 13: CMS does not want to be prescriptive regarding which tools should be used and instead recommends that therapists look to their respective national and state associations and accrediting bodies for such resources.
19
CMS Q and A Revised March 2012. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/HomeHealthPPS/Downloads/Therapy_Questions_and_Answers.pdf. Accessed 7/14/12.
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 7
9/27/2014
§409.44(c)(1)(i): Therapy goals which are consistent with the evaluation of the patient’s function
§409.44(c)(1)(iii): Goals must be measurable, and must pertain directly to the patient’s illness or injury, and the patient’s resultant impairments
20
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-11-17/pdf/2010-27778.pdf
§409.44(c)(1): Therapy services must relate directly and specifically to a treatment regimen designed to treat the beneficiary’s illness or injury ◦ §409.44(c)(1)(ii): Documentation describing how the
course of therapy is in accordance with accepted professional standards of clinical practice
§409.44(c)(2)(E)(1): Objective measurement of the effectiveness of the therapy as it relates to the therapy goals
21
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-11-17/pdf/2010-27778.pdf
§409.44(iii)(A)(1): Material improvement requires that the clinical record demonstrate that the patient is making improvement towards goals when measured against his or her condition at the start of treatment
§409.44(iii)(A)(3): Services are not to be considered reasonable and necessary covered therapy services when a patient suffers a transient and easily reversible loss or reduction of function which could reasonably be expected to improve spontaneously as the patient gradually resumes normal activities
22
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-11-17/pdf/2010-27778.pdf
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 8
9/27/2014
§409.44(c)(2)(F)(1,2): A clinically supportable statement why there is an expectation that the goals are attainable in a reasonable and generally predictable period of time if patient does not meet maintenance criteria ◦ §409.44(iv):(B)(1) Therapy progress regresses or
plateaus, and the reasons for lack of progress are documented to include justification that continued therapy treatment will lead to resumption of progress toward goals
§409.44(c)(2)(H)(4): In the case of maintenance therapy, the patient is responding to therapy and can meet the goals in a predictable period of time
23
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-11-17/pdf/2010-27778.pdf
Jimmo v. Sebelius
No Improvement Standard
The skills of a therapist are necessary to maintain, prevent, or slow further deterioration of the patient’s functional status,
services cannot be safely and effectively carried out by the beneficiary personally, or with the assistance of non-therapists, including unskilled caregivers
24
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Medicare Benefit Policy Manual (100-02) ◦ Chapter 12. Comprehensive Outpatient
Rehabilitation Facility Coverage (CORF)
◦ Chapter 15. Covered Medical and Other Health Services
Medicare Claims Processing Manual (100-04) ◦ Chapter 5
Transmittals
25
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 9
9/27/2014
The severity modifier reflects the beneficiary’s percentage of functional impairment as determined by the clinician furnishing the therapy services for each functional status: current, goal, or discharge. In selecting the severity modifier, the clinician: ◦ Uses the severity modifier that reflects the score from a
functional assessment tool or other performance measurement instrument, as appropriate
◦ Uses his/her clinical judgment to combine the results of multiple measurement tools used during the evaluative process to inform clinical decision making to determine a functional limitation percentage
◦ Uses his/her clinical judgment in the assignment of the appropriate modifier
26
Q16) Is there a list of Medicare-approved functional assessment tools?
A16) CMS does not have a list of approved or endorsed functional assessment tools.
27
http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Billing/TherapyServices/Downloads/Functional-Reporting-PT-OT-SLP-Services-FAQ.pdf
Compliance with regulations
OR
Identify impairments, create effective care plans with patient engagement and improved patient adherence in order to achieve better outcomes and justify care provision
28
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 10
9/27/2014
Compliance with regulations
OR
Identify impairments, create effective care plans with patient engagement and improved patient adherence in order to achieve better outcomes and justify care provision
29
ICD-9 (soon to be ICD-10) ◦ International Classification of Diseases – diagnosis of
diseases, disorders and other health conditions
ICF ◦ International Classification of Functioning, disability and
Health – human functioning and disability are described as a dynamic interaction between various health conditions and environmental and personal factors
The ICD-10 and ICF are complementary to each other. Using both classification systems provides a broader picture of the health of an individual
31
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 11
9/27/2014
June 2008, the APTA House of Delegates officially endorsed the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Heath (ICF)
ICF offers a large area of domains that may be considered when evaluating a patient and in determining what other influences may be affecting the patient, such as environmental factors
32
Practice Matters: What is the ICF? By Anita Bemis-Dougherty, PT, DPT, MAS February 2009. PT in Motion.
Test selection may be function-based or structure-based
Biopsychosocial model, attempts to integrate the medical and social models of disability. ◦ In the biopsychosocial model, disability is viewed as
a consequence of biological, personal, and social forces Alan Jette, PTJ 2006
http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/86/5/726.full
ICF Beginners Guide ◦ http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/training/icfb
eginnersguide.pdf
33
34
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 12
9/27/2014
Classification System of Health/Function (not Disability like Nagi Model)
◦ Body Function ◦ Body Structure ◦ Activities and Participation ◦ Environmental Factors
Framework for describing and organizing info on functioning and disability
Shift focus from disability to the persons level of health
35
The physiological functions of body systems (including psychological functions)
Examples include: ◦ Mental functions ◦ Sensory functions and pain ◦ Functions of the cardiovascular, haematological,
immunological and respiratory systems ◦ Functions of the digestive, metabolic, endocrine
systems ◦ Neuromusculoskeletal and movement-related
functions ◦ Functions of the skin and related structures
36
Performance Based testing
Mental Functions – MOCA
Neuromusculoskeletal and movement – BERG, TINETTI POMA, DGI, mCTSIB, etc.
37
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 13
9/27/2014
Anatomical parts of the body such as organs, limbs and their components
Structure of the nervous system The eye, ear and related structures Structures involved in voice and speech Structure of the cardiovascular, immunological and
respiratory systems Structures related to the digestive, metabolic and
endocrine systems Structure related to genitourinary and reproductive
systems Structures related to movement Skin and related structures
38
Integrity tests ◦ Ligamentous Laxity Testing – stress testing
◦ Cranial Nerve Testing
◦ Imaging
◦ Vestibular Positional Vertigo Testing
◦ Nerve Testing – impingement testing
39
40
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 14
9/27/2014
Activity is the execution of a task or action by an individual
Participation is involvement in a life situation
Activity Limitations are difficulties an individual may have in executing activities
Participation Restrictions are problems an individual may experience in involvement in life situations
41
42
Environmental Factors make up the physical, social and attitudinal environment in which people live and conduct their lives
These factors range from physical factors such as climate and terrain, to social attitudes, institutions, and laws
Belief system
Support and relationships
43
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 15
9/27/2014
44
45
Knowing what the numbers mean
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 16
9/27/2014
Know basic statistics ◦ Know what the numbers mean
Know where to find the tests
Know what tests are appropriate to use
Know how to administer the tests
Know how to use the results
47
48
49
“… one in which there is reasonable intertester (interobserver) reliability.” – Rothstein
“To determine whether a measurement is objective, one needs to assess the reliability of the measurement.” – Rothstein
Validity – one in which the instrument (test) is measuring what it is intended to measure (the construct)
Psychometric Properties are “those aspects of a test or a measure that say how good the test or measure is” ◦ Reliability ◦ Validity
Rothstein JM: On defining subjective and objective measurements. Phys Ther 69:
577-579, 1989
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 17
9/27/2014
Statistical terms are inherent to research and evidenced-based practice
Psychometric Properties
Normative Data
Reliability – consistency in measure (inter and intra rater)
Validity – the measure is measuring what is intended to measure
Objective measurements are measures that have reliability and validity
50
True positive: ◦ the patient has the disease and the test is positive
False positive: ◦ the patient does not have the disease but the test is
positive
True negative: ◦ the patient does not have the disease and the test
is negative
False negative: ◦ the patient has the disease but the test is negative
51
Sensitivity: ◦ def: measures the proportion of actual positives
which are correctly identified as such (e.g. the percentage of sick people who are correctly identified as having the condition)
◦ If the test is highly sensitive and the test result is negative you can be nearly certain that they don’t have disease
◦ A Sensitive test helps rule out disease (when the result is negative). Sensitivity rule out or "Snout"
52
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 18
9/27/2014
Specificity: ◦ def: measures the proportion of negatives which are
correctly identified (e.g. the percentage of healthy people who are correctly identified as not having the condition)
◦ If the test result for a highly specific test is positive you can be nearly certain that they actually have the disease
◦ A very specific test rules in disease with a high degree of confidence. Specificity rule in or "Spin"
53
Sensitivity & Specificity (cont’d): ◦ Perfect = 100%, or the ability to correctly predict
true positives (sensitivity) and true negatives (specificity) all the time
◦ Statistically, however, there always (theoretically) exists some level of error (or . . . “nothing is 100%”)
54
BERG POMA - T
Cut-off ≤42/56
Sensitivity – 91%
Specificity – 82%
A negative result means that the person is probably not a high risk for falling
Cut-off =19 Sensitivity – 64%
Specificity – 66.1%
Not a good test to rule in or out a risk for falling
55
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 19
9/27/2014
13.5 second cut-off score Sensitivity = 0.87 means . . . .the TUG accurately
identifies (+) fall risk in the community-dwelling elderly person 87% of the time
OR, 13% of the time, (+) falls risk is incorrectly identified (when, in reality, the individual is not a falls risk)
Specificity = 0.87 means . . . The TUG accurately identifies non-fall risk in the community-dwelling elderly person 87% of the time
OR, 13% of the time no falls risk is incorrectly identified (when, in reality, the individual is a falls risk)
56
Minimally Detectable Change (MDC): ◦ def: minimal change that falls outside the
measurement error in the score of an instrument used to measure a symptom
Clinically Significant Difference(CSD)/Minimal Clinically Important Change(MCIC): ◦ def: minimal change in the score that is meaningful
for patients
57
What tests do most therapists currently use? ◦ Range of motion (ROM)]
◦ Manual muscle tests (MMT)
◦ Falls risk assessment
Timed Up & Go (TUG)
Missouri Alliance (MAHC-10)
58
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 20
9/27/2014
Resources for finding these instruments: ◦ American Physical Therapy Association (APTA)
www.PTNow.org
◦ Home Health Section of APTA
www.homehealthsection.org
◦ National Institutes of Health (NIH) Toolbox
www.nihtoolbox.org
◦ Rehab Institute of Chicago (RIC)
www.rehabmeasures.org
◦ Geriatric Assessment Tool Kit
http://web.missouri.edu/~proste/tool/
59
ROM and MMT are not enough to capture the patient’s functional impairments and the data obtained can be disputed as objective by CMS ◦ ROM and MMT provide data that can be argued as
not meeting the CMS requirement of objective testing as reliability of test results are limited.
◦ Reliability is questionable [as used in research where standardized protocols are used] and even worse when standardized protocols are not followed [as seen in homecare]
60
ROM Reliability ◦ Testing is performed without following
standardized test positions
◦ Rounding of values in 5° increments does not indicate use of goniometer for measurement
“eyeball” of ROM; educated estimates
Intertester variability = 5-8° if done accurately
◦ Use of “WFL” without comprehensive assessment of ROM during all necessary functional activities
During self-care, ADLs and IADLs
61
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 21
9/27/2014
Testing is performed without following standardized test positions ◦ Full ROM test vs isometric (break) test
Variability in applied resistance by clinician completing test ◦ What is min resist vs mod resistance?
Therapist scoring does not follow defined conventions ◦ What is 3/5 – 4/5 strength range?
Test position is not defined ◦ Are patients placed in gravity resisted/eliminated
positions?
Muscle(s) tested is/are not defined ◦ What position is forearm in when testing elbow flexors?
62
◦ “Manual muscle testing [MMT] is the most widely used method to assess muscle function, however, its reliability and accuracy are questionable. when greater accuracy of results is needed, instruments are available that provide precise readouts of resistive force that muscle works against (i.e., hand dynamometers, pinch grips, and computer-controlled dynamometers).” WK Durfee and PA Iaiazzo
63
Durfee, W.K. and Iaizzo, P.A. 2006. Rehabilitation and Muscle Testing. Encyclopedia
of Medical Devices and Instrumentation. Wiley.
http://www.me.umn.edu/~wkdurfee/publications/wiley-chap-2006.pdf. Accessed 7/15/12
64
Specific population(s): N/A
Age/gender norms: N/A ◦ Gender differences do exist
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ **see slide for muscle test
score definitions
◦ Important to test, when able, in proper test positions Gravity resisted
Gravity eliminated
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) 0.86 – 0.97
Tester consistency best
Study looked at hip and shoulder muscle testing
*½ MMT grade variation is not significant when same tester completes test-retest
*1MMT grade variation is not significant between 2 testers
Protocol for standardized administration
◦ Equipment: NONE ◦ Time: Variable, depending on
number of muscles being tested
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 22
9/27/2014
65
Gravity Eliminated Grades
Gravity Resisted Grades
2+/5 = < ½ ROM gravity resisted position or minimal resistance/full ROM gravity eliminated position
2/5 = full ROM gravity eliminated position; no resistance
2-/5 = > ½ ROM gravity eliminated position
1+/5 = < ½ ROM gravity eliminated position or palpable AND visible contraction
1/5 = palpable contraction/no ROM completed
0/5 = no palpable contraction/no ROM completed
3-/5 = > ½ ROM gravity resisted position
3/5 = full ROM gravity resisted position; no resistance
3+/5 = full ROM gravity resisted + minimal resistance
4-/5 = full ROM gravity resisted + min-mod resistance
4/5 = full ROM gravity resisted + mod resistance
4+/5 = full ROM gravity resisted + mod-max resistance
5/5 = full ROM gravity resisted + max resistance
The Guide to Physical Therapist Practice identifies 24 Guide categories ◦ ROM [Range of Motion] and Muscle strength [Muscle
Performance] are but two of them
◦ These categories are not appropriate for all patients. [Example, patient with CHF…]
◦ Other category measures seen in audits include:
Gait, Locomotion and Balance
Aerobic Capacity/Endurance
◦ But, are the documented results objective?
66
Guide to Physical Therapist Practice. 2nd Ed. APTA. Alexandria, Virginia. 2003
Absence of standardization/competency ◦ Example: The TUG is the baseline tool for falls risk
for your agency.
Have the following been defined?
How to measure test track? (distance)
What marks the distance?
When do you start and stop the timer?
Equipment needs
Scoring method defined
Interpretation of results
Documentation that includes findings
Goals, Opinion Statements
67
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 23
9/27/2014
Independent, Supervision, SBA, CGA, Min A, Mod A, Max A, Total, Dependent levels of assist are not objective measures, but, rather a subjective opinion of the therapist grading the level of assistance required
Mod assist for bathing is not an objective measure. It is a qualitative measure that requires further detail about WHY the level of assist is required
68
Assessment of balance and endurance lack objective test measures. ◦ Poor/Fair/Good balance assessments lack:
Correlation to fall risk What is the likelihood that patient with Fair balance is at risk
for falls?
Ability to quantify change/progress What is the “amount” of improvement with an improvement
from Poor → Fair balance?
◦ Poor/Fair/Good endurance assessments are unable to objectively document functional limitations and quantify change/improvements What does Poor+ endurance mean? How is it defined? Is it
the same for all clinicians or at the discretion of each individual clinician?
69
“Takes too long. I don’t have time.”
“I am not sure how to do the tests.”
“I don’t know what the results mean.”
“I don’t need to do objective testing.”
“I don’t want to do objective testing.”
70
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 24
9/27/2014
Knowing what the numbers mean
60 y/o patient with recent hospitalization referred for home care following COPD exac.
How do you objectively assess patient to see if progression from rolling walker to single point cane is appropriate?
72
Discussion
73
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 25
9/27/2014
Discussion ◦ Assess for balance/gait impairments
Assess for falls risk/mobility
◦ Assess for aerobic capacity/endurance impairments
74
Aerobic Capacity/Endurance Arousal/Attention/Cognition Balance/Balance Confidence Gait/Locomotion Mobility/ADL/IADL Strength
75
65 y/o patient referred for PT after having knee replacement. Post op day 15. ◦ Rehab course – 3 days acute hospital and 11 days in
SNF.
What objective measures do you use to identify impairments for POC creation?
76
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 26
9/27/2014
Discussion
77
Discussion ◦ Knee ROM flexion and extension – use of
goniometer, describe test position (describe end feel)
◦ Flexibility testing – Hamstrings, Calves
◦ Knee strength MMT flexion and extension – describe test position
◦ Chair stand test
◦ One leg stance test
◦ Gait speed
78
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 27
9/27/2014
80
Specific population(s): ◦ None defined
Age/gender norms: N/A Descriptive
categories/cut-off scores: ◦ Perception of exertion
depends mainly on the strain and fatigue in muscles and on feeling of breathlessness or aches in the chest
◦ 6-20 scale (original) 11-14 = mid-range
◦ 1-10 scale (modified) 3-6 = mid-range
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) .91
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: rating scale
◦ Time: < 5 minutes
81
Borg Modified Borg
Rating Perception of effort Rating Perception of Effort
6 No exertion at all 0 Nothing at all
7 Extremely light 0.5 Very, very weak (just noticeable)
8 1 Very weak
9 Very light
10 2 Weak
11 Light
12 3 Moderate
13 Somewhat hard 4 Somewhat strong
14
15 Hard (heavy) 5 Strong (heavy)
16 6
17 Very Hard 7 Very strong
18 8
19 Extremely hard 9
20 Maximal exertion 10 Very, very strong (almost maximal)
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults
Age/gender norms: ◦ 5-yr increments from 60-94
years of age
◦ Male/female norms
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ Average range of steps
◦ Below & above average designations
82
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = .90
◦ Criterion Validity = .73 - .74 with 1-mi. walk, treadmill
Moderate correlations
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: stop watch;
tally counter; tape measure or 30inch string; masking tape
◦ Time: approx. 5 minutes
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 28
9/27/2014
83
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults
Age/gender norms: ◦ 5-yr increments from 60-
94 years of age ◦ Male/female norms
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ Average range of steps ◦ Below & above average
designations
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = .90 ◦ Criterion Validity = .73 -
.74 with 1-mi. walk, treadmill Moderate correlations
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: stop watch;
tally counter; tape measure or 30inch string; masking tape
◦ Time: Approx. 5 minutes
Age Men Women
60-64 87-115 75-107
65-69 86-116 73-107
70-74 80-110 68-101
75-79 73-109 68-100
80-84 71-103 60-91
85-89 59-91 55-85
90-94 52-86 44-72
84
85
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 29
9/27/2014
87
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults ◦ Parkinson’s Disease ◦ TIA/CVA
Age/gender norms: N/A Descriptive categories/cut-off
scores: ◦ Normal = > 26/30 ◦ Mild Cognitive Impairment
(MCI) = < 26/30 Range: 19-25 (avg: 22)
◦ Alzheimer’s Disease = < 26/30 Range: 11-21 (avg: 16)
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Sensitivity:
MCI = 90%
AD = 100%
◦ Specificity: 87%
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: instructional
guide; score form; pencil/pen; stopwatch
◦ Time: 15-30 minutes
88
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults Age/gender norms: N/A Descriptive categories/cut-
off scores: ◦ Normal:
> HS Education: > 27/30
< HS Education: > 25/30
◦ Mild Neurocognitive Disorder (MNCD): > HS Education: 21-26/30
< HS Education: 20-24/30
◦ Dementia: > HS Education: 1-20/30
< HS Education: 1-19/30
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Sensitivity and Specificity
*category dependent
◦ 95% Confidence Intervals
*category dependent
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: instructional
guide; form; pencil/pen
◦ Time: 7 minutes
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 30
9/27/2014
89
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling adults (age
range 18-89 years)
Age/gender norms: ◦ Age (11 categories) and education
(2 categories) variances
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores:
Increasing age + decreasing education resulted in ↓ scores
Not equivalent on Trail A and B Higher scores = greater
impairment Trail A: avg = 29 secs.
abnormal = > 78 secs. Trail B: avg = 75 secs.
abnormal = >273 secs.
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Not described in research
literature reviewed ◦ Commonly used in research
published in peer-review journals
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: instructional
guide; score form; pencil/pen
◦ Time: Trail A ~ 90 seconds Trail B ~ 3 minutes
90
Specific population(s): ◦ Elderly persons with/without
mild-moderate dementia and/or physical illness
Age/gender norms: N/A
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ 1-4 Score = No cause for
concern
◦ 5-9 Score = Strong probability of depression
◦ 10+ Score = Indicative of depression
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Sensitivity (at 4/5 cut-
off): 92.7%
◦ Specificity (at 4/5 cut-off): 65.2%
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: scoring
guide; form; pencil/pen ◦ Time: 5 minutes
91
Specific population(s): ◦ Elderly persons with suspected
depression; with/without dementia
Age/gender norms: N/A
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ Final ratings represent the rater’s
clinical impression rather than informant responses.
◦ Scale Range of Scores from 0-2 (19 items)
◦ Scores > 10 = probable major depression
◦ Scores > 18 = definite major depression
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Correlative status with GDS
◦ Convergent Validity: High
◦ Sensitivity: 93% (at > 6)
◦ Specificity: 97% (at > 6)
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: scoring guide;
score form; pencil/pen
◦ Time: 20 minutes
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 31
9/27/2014
92
93
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 32
9/27/2014
95
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults (> 65 yrs and older)
◦ Parkinsonism
Age/gender norms: N/A
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ < 45/56 = impaired
balance; (+) falls risk
◦ > 45/56 = impaired balance; (-) falls risk Sensitivity ↑’s with cut-off
score >48/56
**PTJ S Muir 2008 article – discourages use of dichotomous score for fall risk determination
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) > .90 ◦ Sensitivity: 91% ◦ Specificity: 82% ◦ Clinically significant
difference/minimally detectable change: 6, 8 pts
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: score sheet,
stopwatch, shoe, ruler, stepstool
◦ Time: 20 minutes
96
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults
Age/gender norms: N/A
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ 25-28 = low falls risk ◦ 19-24 = medium falls risk ◦ < 19 = high falls risk
Sensitivity and specificity vary based on individual studies
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) 0.93 ◦ Sensitivity:
Gait (8/12 cut-off) = 21% Balance (12/16 cut-off) = 24%
◦ Specificity: Gait (8/12 cut-off) = 95% Balance (12/16 cut-off) = 91%
◦ Clinically significant difference/minimally detectable change: 5 points (PTJ)
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: hard, armless chair;
stopwatch, 15ft walkway ◦ Time: 20 minutes
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults (> 65 yrs and older) ◦ Vestibular
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ > 15 seconds = impaired
balance; (+) falls risk – community dwelling older adult
◦ >12 seconds = impaired balance; (+) falls risk – vestibular population
97
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) > .99
◦ Sensitivity: 85%
◦ Specificity: 88%
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: stopwatch, 4
canes
◦ Time: < 5 minutes
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 33
9/27/2014
Start by standing in square 1, facing square 2 (imagine that direction is facing “north”)
Begin in a clockwise direction, i.e. 2-3-4-1; then immediately move counterclockwise, i.e. to squares 4-3-2-1.
Clock starts when first foot contacts box 2 and stops when last foot returns to box 1.
98
99
Specific population(s): ◦ Older adults (60+ yrs. of
age)
Age/gender norms: available (Springer et al.)
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ < 5 seconds is predictive
of an injurious fall according to Vellas et al.
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Inter-rater reliability =
ICC=0.994
Protocol for standardized administration
◦ Equipment: Instruction sheet, stop watch/timer
◦ Time: <5 minutes
100
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 34
9/27/2014
101
Specific population(s): ◦ Older adults (ranging from
65-95 yrs of age) ◦ > 1 yr post-stroke ◦ Parkinsonism; PD
Age/gender norms: N/A
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ > 80% = balance
confidence WFL; no probable fear of falling
◦ < 80%: impaired balance confidence; (+) fear of falling
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) 0.92
◦ Correlation with FES = 0.84
Protocol for standardized administration
◦ Equipment: instruction sheet; score sheet; pencil/pen
◦ Time: 10 minutes
102
Many adaptations made to FES. FES- I
Specific population(s): ◦ Older adults (age ranges 66-
89 yrs of age) ◦ With/without cognitive
impairments
Age/gender norms: N/A
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ > 80% = balance confidence
WFL; no probable fear of falling
◦ < 80%: impaired balance confidence; (+) fear of falling
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (test-retest) 0.71
◦ Correlation with ABC = 0.84
Protocol for standardized administration
◦ Equipment: score/instruction form; pencil/pen
◦ Time: 10 minutes
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 35
9/27/2014
104
Specific population(s): ◦ Adults/Older adults
(ranging from 45-90 yrs of age)
◦ Parkinson’s Disease
◦ Post-stroke
◦ Vestibulopathy
Age/gender norms: N/A
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ < 22/30 predictive of falls
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) 0.93; (test-
retest) 0.91
Sensitivity: 72%
Specificity: 78%
◦ Vestibulopathy = (ICC) 0.86; (test-retest) 0.74
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: score sheet;
stopwatch; shoe box; steps; pencil/pen
◦ Time: 5 minutes ◦ Space: approximately 20
feet
105
Specific population(s): ◦ Adults/Older adults (ranging
from 21-77 yrs of age)
◦ Parkinson’s Disease; MS
◦ > 3 mos post-stroke ◦ Vestibulopathy
Age/gender norms: N/A
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ < 19/24 = (+) falls risk in
community-dwelling older adult
◦ < 12/24 = (+) falls risk in MS
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) 0.96
◦ Correlation with TUG = 0.80
◦ Validity (construct/concurrent) = 0.68 – 0.83
◦ MDC/CSD: 2.9 pts
Protocol for standardized administration
◦ Equipment: score sheet; 2 obstacles (same size); stairs; 20ft path; pencil/pen
◦ Time: 6-30 minutes
106
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) 0.96-0.97
◦ Correlation between 8ft and 20ft = 0.933
◦ Clinically significant/meaningful change:
Meaningful: 0.05m/second
Substantial: 0.10m/second
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: stopwatch;
measuring tape ( > 10ft) ◦ Time: < 5 minutes ◦ Acceleration and
Deceleration zone ◦ Test Track: Any distance
between 8 and 20 feet
Specific population(s): ◦ Older adults (ranging from
50-98 yrs of age) ◦ Post-stroke; OA; CHF;
post-fracture
Age/gender norms: multiple studies available
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ Various distances; can be
measured in ft/sec or m/sec.
Results are predictive of falls, adverse health outcome
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 36
9/27/2014
Gait Velocity Distance
Score Categories/Cut-off Feet/Meter Conversion
10 Feet
<1.97ft/sec = predictive of hospitalization risk < 1.86ft/sec = (+) falls risk
______________
4 Meter
0.0-0.4m/sec = household amb. 0.4-0.6m/sec = limited community amb < 0.57m/sec = (+) falls risk 0.6 – 1.0m/sec = lmtd – safe community amb > 1.0m/sec = functional community amb > 1.2m/sec = safe to cross streets
13 feet 1.48
inches
107
Start Walk Stop Walk
Start Timer Stop Timer
NOTE: There are additional distances that can be utilized for testing – establish internal consistency in your agency. NOTE: The shortest distance found reliable/valid in the research literature is 8 feet. Distances greater than 20 feet become difficult to establish in the home setting.
Fritz S. and Lusardi M. “Gait Velocity: The 6th Vital Sign” Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy Vol. 32;2:09:2-5.
108
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 37
9/27/2014
110
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults ◦ Vestibulopathy
◦ Parkinson’s Disease ◦ Post-hip fracture
◦ Alzheimer’s Disease
Age/gender norms: see next slide
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ Mobility impairment
categories (ref next slide)
◦ > 14 seconds = (+) falls risk
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = 0.98 – 0.99 ◦ Sensitivity: 0.80 ◦ Specificity: 0.934 ◦ Correlates mod-high with:
Berg, gait velocity, Barthel
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: stopwatch;
tape measure; standard-height chair with arms
◦ Time: 2-5 minutes
Time to Complete Test Mobility Impairment Category
Falls Risk
< 10 seconds Independent NO
10-20 seconds Mostly Independent YES, if > 14 seconds
20-30 seconds Moderately Impaired YES
> 30 seconds Severely Impaired; probable ADL dysfunction
YES
111
Variations in measurement: 10ft distance measured from either front leg of test chair or front of individual’s foot when seated in chair Variations in test setup – cone vs. tape on floor
112
Pondal M and del Ser T. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2008.
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 38
9/27/2014
TUG 8 foot up and go
A Shumway Cook
10 feet distance
Fully seated
Falls risk predictor and mobility indicator
Use tape or cone
Rikli and Jones 8 feet distance Fully seated Age/Gender Normative
data available for 60-94 y/o
Use cone
113
114
Variations exist – seated v standing and multi-directional reach
Specific population(s): ◦ Disease specific and age
specific population data available
Age/gender norms: available: YES
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ < 18.5 cm (7.3 inches)
indicates fall risk (75% Sensitivity, 67% Specificity)
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Inter-rater reliability =
ICC=0.994
Protocol for standardized administration
◦ Equipment: Instruction sheet, yardstick and tape
◦ Time: <5 minutes
Age Men Women
20-40 16.73 in. 14.64 in.
41-69 14.98 in. 13.81 in.
70-87 13.16 in. 10.47 in.
115
(Duncan et al. 1990)
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 39
9/27/2014
116
118
Normative Data for Arm Curl Test.
Women 60 - 64 65 - 69 70 - 74 75 - 79 80 - 84 85 - 89 90 – 94
Arm Curl Test (# of reps)
13-19 12-18 12-17 11-17 10-16 10-15 8-13
Men 60 - 64 65 - 69 70 - 74 75 - 79 80 - 84 85 - 89 90 – 94
Arm Curl Test (# of reps)
16-22 15-21 14-21 13-19 13-19 11-17 10-14
Arm Curl Test: Assesses upper-body strength
Equipment: Stopwatch, folding chair without arms, 5-lb.dumbbell for women,
8-lb dumbbell for men. Scoring: The score is the total number of arm curls completed in 30 seconds. If the arm is more than halfway up at the end of 30 seconds, it counts as a curl.
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 40
9/27/2014
119
Specific population(s): ◦ Community-dwelling older
adults
Age/gender norms: ◦ 5-yr increments from 60-
94 years of age ◦ Male/female norms
Descriptive categories/cut-off scores: ◦ Average range of
completed stands ◦ Below & above average
designations
Psychometric Properties: ◦ Reliability = (ICC) 0.90;
(test-retest) 0.96
◦ Correlates to leg press performance for LE strength (0.78 men; 0.71 women)
Protocol for standardized administration ◦ Equipment: test chair;
stopwatch; tally counter
◦ Time: < 5 minutes
Age Men Women
60-64 14-19 12-17
65-69 12-18 11-16
70-74 12-17 10-15
75-79 11-17 10-15
80-84 10-15 9-14
85-89 8-14 8-13
90-94 7-12 4-11
120
121
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 41
9/27/2014
Choose objective tests based on the patient’s history, systems review, diagnoses, and functional impairments
Document the results of the chosen objective tests
Give meaning to the results. ◦ Make professional opinions based on the
results ◦ For example, what does a Tinetti POMA
score of 12/28 mean for falls risk? Use test results to form goals Use results of objective tests to assist in
creating plan of care
123
Use the ICF model to identify barriers for an effective plan to be implemented
◦ Is there non-adherent or non-compliant behavior?
◦ Is there underlying depression?
◦ Cognitive status?
◦ Adequate support system?
124
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 42
9/27/2014
Expectations for the Home Health Therapist
Justifies that the care being provided is: Reasonable and necessary
Skilled
Medically necessary
Inherently complex that must be provided by nursing and/or therapy
Answer the question, WHY? ◦ Why should you CMS pay you?
◦ What are you providing that only you can provide?
◦ Are the interventions you provide able to be handed off to a caregiver to perform?
126
Requirements: ◦ Reasonable & necessary
An expectation that improvement will occur, and without it, possibility of decline/deterioration (i.e., injury) is real
◦ Interventions according to clinically accepted standards of practice
Evidence-Based Practice approach
◦ Requires the skills of a therapist to be present/complete
Knowledge, training, clinical decision-making, etc.
127
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 43
9/27/2014
So, what does a therapy “skilled” visit look like? ◦ Answer the following questions:
What was taught? (and who was it taught to?)
What did the patient do?
Was there assistance required?
Was there cueing/supervision, etc. required?
If so, how much and for what?
How did the patient respond?
What is your clinical opinion (“assessment”) of the visit? What improved? What didn’t? If not, why not?
What can patient now do (functional relevance)?
Clinical Plan:
What can’t the patient do and why does it continue to require a therapist to visit?
128
129
Case Scenario – Skilled Visit Note Writing
Requirements: ◦ Objective measurement
Evaluation – provides a baseline
Reassessment – progress compared to baseline (IE)
◦ Quantifiable
Allows measurement/comparison
◦ Related to patient impairment(s)/function
Individualized to need
Reasonable for prior level of functioning and in light of current injury/illness or disease/condition
130
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 44
9/27/2014
So, what does a “well written” goal look like? ◦ Answer the following questions:
Who is the focus?
Patient?
Caregiver?
What objective test/measure was utilized?
What improvement is expected?
What quantifiable change in score?
Consistent with score interpretation
What functional improvement is expected to result from this change?
Optional: What time frame should this occur in?
131
Goals should be:
Objective
Measureable
Meaningful
Functional
Realistic
132
133
Case Scenario – Goal Writing
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 45
9/27/2014
134
Be inherently complex, which means that they can be performed safely and/or effectively only by or under the general supervision of a skilled therapist;
Be consistent with the nature and severity of the illness or injury and the patient’s particular medical needs, which include services that are reasonable in amount, frequency, and duration; and
Be considered specific, safe, and effective treatment for the patient’s condition under accepted standards of medical practice.
135
At defined points during a course of treatment, for each therapy discipline for which services are provided, a qualified therapist (instead of an assistant) must perform the ordered therapy service. During these visits, the therapist must:
Assess the patient using a method that allows for objective measurement of function and successive comparison of measurements; and Document the measurement results in the clinical record ◦ 13th visit/19th visit/30 day Reassessments
136
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 46
9/27/2014
Recovery Audit Contractors, or RAC, a program was created through the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003(MMA) to identify and recover improper Medicare payments paid to healthcare providers under fee for service (FFS) Medicare plans
◦ RAC paid on % of recovered improper payments . . . .
137
Zone Program Integrity Contractors (ZPIC audits) are organizations hired indirectly (or in connection with other CMS affiliated contractors) by CMS to perform a wide range of medical review, data analysis and Medicare audits looking for Medicare fraud.
138
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 47
9/27/2014
Patient is receiving home physical therapy. 1-3x per week and has received 25 visits and is about to be recertified
Prior level of function – Amb with Mod assist
No objective tests were performed
Visit #1. Amb 5’ with Mod Assist
Visit #25. Amb 10’ with Min Assist
Is this reasonable? Is this skilled?
140
Patient is receiving outpatient physical therapy 3x per week and has received 10 visits for R knee arthritis.
Prior level of function – Indep. Amb with intermittent use of cane. Works full time.
Pain level has remained consistently at 5/10.
Lower extremity functional scale improved 3 points from visit 1 to visit 10
Is this reasonable?
141
True/False. The International Classification of Function, Disability and Health (ICF) is a classification system based on the medical model of disease
True/False. Balance confidence is a metric that is predictive of fall risk
True/False. Home Health and Outpatient therapy settings require objective testing
142
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 48
9/27/2014
143
Contact information: [email protected]
Q & A
World Health Organization. 2002. Towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability, and Health. Available at: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/training/icfbeginnersguide.pdf. Accessed 7/22/14.
World Health Organization. 2013. How to use the ICF. A Practical Manual for using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF): Exposure draft for comment. Available at: http://www.who.int/classifications/drafticfpracticalmanual2.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 7/22/14.
144
Powell, LE & Myers AM. The Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale. J Gerontol Med Sci 1995; 50(1): M28-34
Myers AM, Fletcher PC, Myers AN, Sherk W. Discriminative and evaluative properties of the ABC Scale. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1998;53:M287-M294.
Lajoie Y, Gallagher SP. Predicting falls within the elderly community: comparison of postural sway, reaction time, the Berg balance scale and ABC scale for comparing fallers and non-fallers. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2004;38:11-26.
145
Not to be copied without permission of KL Miller 49
9/27/2014
Rothstein JM: On defining subjective and objective measurements. Phys Ther 69:577-579, 1989.
NIH Toolbox. http://www.nihtoolbox.org/RFP/NIH%20Toolbox%20Overview%20and%20Instruments%202-2012.pdf. Accessed 9/4/2012.
146
Guide to Physical Therapist Practice. 2nd Ed. Phys Ther. 2005;81:9-744.
Rosenbaum S. Law and the Public’s Health. Public Health Report. 2011;126:130-135.
Lalkhen AG, McCluskey A. Clinical tests: sensitivity and specificity. Contin Educ Anaesthesia, Crit Care Pain . 2008;8 (6 ):221–223. doi:10.1093/bjaceaccp/mkn041.
Binkley JM, Stratford PW, Lott SA, Riddle DL, Network TNAORR. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): Scale Development, Measurement Properties, and Clinical Application. Phys Ther . 1999;79 (4 ):371–383. Available at: http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/79/4/371.abstract.
147
Faber MJ, Bosscher RJ, van Wieringen PCW. Clinimetric Properties of the Performance-Oriented Mobility Assessment. Phys Ther . 2006;86 (7 ):944–954. Available at: http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/86/7/944.abstract
Pondal M and del Ser T. Normative Data and Determinants for the Timed "Up and Go" Test in a Population-Based Sample of Elderly Individuals Without Gait Disturbances. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2008;31(2):57-63
148