Using ICD-10-based Social Determinants of Health Categories to Assess Patients Risk for Acute Care Utilization

INTRODUCTION

Social determinants of Health (SDoH) describe several factors that have become growing areas of interest in healthcare due to their impact on patient health and well-being. The World Health Organization define SDoH as “[t]he conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work, and age”(1). While SDoH are commonly thought of only in terms of socioeconomic factors, the term actually broadly encompasses 1) health-related behaviors, 2) socioeconomic factors, and 3) environmental factors (2). There are a variety of factors that comprise SDoH such as tobacco use, diet and exercise, substance use, education, employment, income, family and social support, community safety, and physical environment safety (3).

In 2007, Dr. Steven Schroeder published an article in the New England Journal of Medicine in which he referenced the impact of social and behavioral factors on health and premature death. The combined contribution of social, environmental, and behavioral factors on a patient’s risk for premature death was estimated to be as high as 60%, with genetics contributing 30%, and medical care providing only 10% (4). It is worth noting how low the impact of medical care was estimated to be relative to SDoH.

Ten years after that article, Dr. Sanne Magnan reiterated the importance of SDoH, referencing a model from the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute’s County Health Rankings & Roadmaps program (2). This model was designed to help identify the factors that impact health in terms of quality of life and longevity in order to stimulate discussion and action in the form of potential changes to policies and programs (5). The County Health Rankings model also illustrated the significant impact of the social determinants on health outcomes, but did not include genetics in its factors influencing health outcomes, as the purpose of this specific model was to look at modifiable factors that could be affected by policy changes. It is interesting to note that, in the County Health Rankings model, modifying health behaviors, social & economic factors, and physical environment could collectively contribute up to 80% towards improving health versus only 20% from modifying clinical care issues. This research again strikingly shows the relatively low impact of direct clinical care, suggesting that SDoH represent a high yield, yet untapped potential for making significant improvements in patient outcomes in healthcare.

The literature has numerous examples describing the impact of different social determinants on health outcomes. Braveman and Gottlieb observed that lower educational status and income were associated with decreased life expectancy at age 25 and increased presence of chronic disease respectively (6). Yelin et al. noted in the literature that poverty appeared to be associated with worse systemic lupus erythematous disease damage (7). Joynt et al. suspected in 2012 that 30-day readmission rates are driven more by a hospital’s patient population and the resources of the community in which it is located than internal factors relating to the hospital itself (8). This appeared to be supported by a recent study by Hu et al. in 2018 demonstrating that a high area deprivation index (ADI) score, which reflects how socioeconomically disadvantaged a geographic region is, was associated with a significantly higher 30-day readmission risk than a lower ADI score (9).

Despite the mounting evidence regarding the role of SDoH on health outcomes, progress in integrating their use has been slow. One of the significant barriers in the past has been in determining a good method to capture the patients’ SDoH profile, though this has become easier in recent years as ICD-10 codes have valid ways to represent many of them to some extent. More recently, the American Medical Association and United Healthcare have collaborated to plan the development of up to two dozen new ICD-10 codes to further identify SDoH risk and integrate it into care (10). The purpose of this project was to leverage the ICD-10 codes to identify and link SDoH to patients with a high probability of utilizing acute care services and to determine if social service intervention reduced care utilization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Identifying Social Determinants of Health Risk

A total of 11 SDoH risk factor categories were determined using previous SDoH work by Schroeder and the Kaiser Family Foundation (3,4). The risk factors were organized by clustering SDoH that were deemed applicable to the VAMC population and that could be readily extracted from the EHR. Schroeder identified that social factors, environmental exposures, and behavioral patterns were modifiable factors influencing health outcomes beyond health care itself. The Kaiser Family Foundation identified 6 major categories which were further subdivided into 29 minor categories. The category of the Health Care System (including coverage and access to a primary care physician) was excluded since the entire study was completed with active patients within a single location within the VA system. The category of food was expanded to include exercise, and categories that have with significant social and medical impact were added (mental health challenges and tobacco, alcohol, and substance use). The final SDoH categories used for this study are listed in Table 1.

When reviewing patient records, one point was assigned per SDoH risk category in which at least one corresponding ICD-10 code was present. A patient could be assigned a total possible cumulative risk score of 11 points if they were found to have at least one ICD-10 corresponding to each category. Multiple codes within the same category were therefore considered to be one entity for the purposes of this work as the emphasis was placed more on how many categories of SDoH were relevant rather than the number of codes per category were present. This would prevent duplication of similar codes from over-estimating the impact of SDoH due to concepts being associated with each other or overlapping in context (i.e. Z65.2 - problems related to release from prison vs. Z65.1 - imprisonment and other incarceration).

RESULTS

Based on the initial inclusion criteria parameters, an initial cohort of 59,134 patients was determined. After exclusion criteria stratification, the resulting cohort for January 2017 to December 2017 was 44,401. Of this cohort, 9,379 patients had ER visits and 2,566 patients had hospitalizations during this time interval. Of the total cohort of 44,401, the population had an average age of 58 years +/− 17.4 years and were predominantly male (91%), non-Hispanic (83.2%), and Caucasian (91.8%). In terms of SDoH risk factors in the cohort, 53.3% of patients had at least one risk factor. Details about these demographics and number of SDoH risk factors identified per individual are summarized in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.

Patients who had more SDoH risk factors identified using the ICD-10 categories were likely to have more ER visits and hospitalizations in a given year. Among patients with at least seven SDoH risk factors, the annual ER visit rate was 26 times higher and the annual hospitalization rate was 54 times higher compared to those without a SDoH. The acute care utilization rates by number of SDoH categories is represented in Fig 1.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Fig 1:

ER visit (a) and hospitalization (b) rates by number of SDoH risk factors for year 2017 for individuals with a Charlson score of zero.

For each SDoH risk factor, the odds ratios (OR) for both ER visits and hospitalization were greater than one and statistically significant, with ORs for each risk factor ranging from 1.77 to 13.01 for ER visits and 1.86 to 18.44 for hospitalizations (Table 4). Patients who had started to use a social service or increased their use of social services had decreased rates of ER visits and hospitalizations, whereas those who had not been seen by social services or decreased their social service utilization had an increase in their annual rate of acute care visits, regardless of social service utilized (Fig 2). Those who used more categories of social services were also more likely to have decreased acute care utilization rates (Fig 3).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Fig 2:

Average annual change in (a) ER visits and (b) hospitalizations in year 2017 compared to 2016 based on whether patients were newly seen (or had increased visits) or were not seen (or had decreased visits).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Fig 3:

The average change in acute care utilization from year 2016 to year 2017 plotted against the number of distinct Social Services that saw the patient between ER visits (a) and hospitalizations (b) from one year to the next.

DISCUSSION

Interest in SDoH is increasing rapidly in healthcare and with good reason. As demonstrated by our results and consistent with other studies, ER visits and hospitalizations were occurring at higher rates with increased numbers of SDoH risk factors, which would confirm that there are more factors outside of currently measured healthcare quality factors that influence outcomes and other healthcare metrics (1–9). Having any of the 11 SDoH risk factor categories identified via ICD-10 code in patients without known chronic illnesses was noted to increase the likelihood of acute care utilization; however, certain risk factors appeared to have a more significant impact than others.

On one end of the spectrum, drug use-based and housing insecurity-based risk factors, the categories with higher impacts, had ORs of 5.74 and 5.41, respectively for ER visits and 9.16 and 6.87, respectively for hospitalizations. On the other end of the spectrum, employment-based risk factors, the category with the lowest impact, had ORs of 1.77 and 1.86, respectively. This may indicate what types of risk factors to focus on when planning future interventions and may be helpful in earlier identification of individuals who would be more likely to utilize acute care. Of note, education-based risk factors had ORs of 13.01 for ER visits and 18.44 for hospitalizations. However, in the Veteran population, not only is education not generally coded, all members will have at a minimum a high school diploma or equivalent or they would not have been allowed to enter active duty. Thus, the education category is likely to be very underrepresented in this study (only 11 total individuals with this risk factor) and may not be as reliable in representing SDoH-associated healthcare disparities in the general population.

Social service utilization was found across the board to be positively impactful in reducing acute care utilization, with case management consistently showing the highest level of impact in both the ER visit and hospitalization rates. This makes sense as case management has one of the largest reaches of all the specific social services (seven of 11 SDoH categories impacted) and involves medical care coordination as well. Utilizing more types of social services also decreased rates of acute care utilization likely for a similar reason.

Even with increasing interest in integrating SDoH, the most optimal approach to risk screening is not clear. This project demonstrates that, within the specific healthcare ecosystem of a VA Medical Center, ICD-10 diagnosis codes corresponding to SDoH risk factors, in addition to employment and income data already collected as part of routine VA eligibility means test, can potentially be used to screen for patients for high social risk since ICD-10 has already been integrated into the EHR. Some efforts have been focused on detecting the presence of SDoH mentioned in the unstructured portion of the EHR using natural language processing (NLP) or using machine learning and NLP on a combination of structured and unstructured data (12–21).

CONCLUSION

Given the increasing importance of the SDoH and their integration into care, the findings from this quality improvement project are important because they represent an efficient method in which SDoH can be captured and linked to health outcomes. Most EHR systems do not yet incorporate SDoH risk screening as part of their data collection, nor do many clinical workflows. The use of the ICD-10 codes does not require any new modification to EHRs.

Furthermore, the impact of utilization by the various social services on acute care utilization is encouraging and suggests a means to make SDoH data actionable. Future work will revolve around operationalizing these findings through personalized healthcare and potential use of new modalities such mobile medical applications as well as improved methods of data capture such as NLP.