Trends of Surgery, Patient, and Surgeon Characteristics for Corneal Transplants in the Medicare Population From 2011 to 2020

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe recent trends in corneal transplants and patient and surgeon characteristics for corneal transplants that occurred in the Medicare population.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study using Current Procedural Terminology codes. We identified Medicare Fee-For-Service (FFS) claims for different types of corneal transplant procedures performed on Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older from 2011 to 2020. Number and types of corneal transplants performed each year and patient and surgeon demographics and characteristics were analyzed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 148,981 corneal transplants performed by 2972 surgeons within the study period. Most corneal transplants performed were endothelial keratoplasties (70.1%). Most patients were women (60.3%) and White (85.8%). 18.2% of patients lived in a rural area, whereas only 3.5% of transplants occurred in a rural area and 5% of surgeons practiced in a rural area. Male surgeons represented 77.8% of all surgeons and performed 84.9% of all corneal transplants in the study period. The proportion of corneal transplants performed by female surgeons gradually increased over time, from 12.1% in 2011 to 19.0% in 2020. The proportion of female surgeons also increased from 16.2% in 2011 to 23.8% in 2020. Most surgeons (67%) performed <6 corneal transplants per year.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the number of female corneal transplant surgeons has increased over time, women remain underrepresented in the surgical workforce. Further investigation should be conducted to identify the underlying reason and address the identified disparities within the landscape of corneal transplantation.

The Medicare Care Choices Model was associated with reductions in disparities in the use of hospice care for Medicare beneficiaries with terminal illness

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of the Medicare Care Choices Model (MCCM) on disparities in hospice use and quality of end-of-life care for Medicare beneficiaries from underserved groups-those from racial and ethnic minority groups, dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, or living in rural areas.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

Medicare enrollment and claims data from 2013 to 2021 for terminally ill Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries nationwide.

STUDY DESIGN

Through MCCM, terminally ill enrolled Medicare beneficiaries received supportive and palliative care services from hospice providers concurrently with curative treatments. Using a matched comparison group, we estimated subgroup-specific effects on hospice use, days at home, and aggressive treatment and multiple emergency department visits in the last 30 days of life.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

The sample included decedent Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in MCCM and a matched comparison group from the same geographic areas who met model eligibility criteria at time of enrollment: having a diagnosis of cancer, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or HIV/AIDS; living in the community; not enrolled in the Medicare hospice benefit in the previous 30 days; and having at least one hospital stay and three office visits in the previous 12 months.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Eligible beneficiaries from underserved groups were underrepresented in MCCM. MCCM increased enrollees' hospice use and the number of days at home and reduced aggressive treatment among all subgroups analyzed. MCCM also reduced disparities in hospice use by race and ethnicity and dual eligibility by 4.1 (90% credible interval [CI]: 1.3-6.1) and 2.4 (90% CI: 0.6-4.4) percentage points, respectively. It also reduced disparities in having multiple emergency department visits for rural enrollees by 1.3 (90% CI: 0.1-2.7) percentage points.

CONCLUSIONS

MCCM increased hospice use and quality of end-of-life care for model enrollees from underserved groups and reduced disparities in hospice use and having multiple emergency department visits.

Impact of comprehensive medication reviews on potentially inappropriate medication discontinuation in Medicare beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

The use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) is associated with increased risk of hospitalizations and emergency room visits and varies by racial and ethnic subgroups. Medicare's nationwide medication therapy management (MTM) program requires that Part D plans offer an annual comprehensive medication review (CMR) to all beneficiaries who qualify, and provides a platform to reduce PIM use. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of CMR on PIM discontinuation in Medicare beneficiaries and whether this differed by race or ethnicity.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of community-dwelling Medicare Part D beneficiaries ≥66 years of age who were eligible for MTM from 2013 to 2019 based on 5% Medicare fee-for-service claims data linked to the 100% MTM data file. Among those using a PIM, MTM-eligible CMR recipients were matched to non-recipients via sequential stratification. The probability of PIM discontinuation was estimated using regression models that pooled yearly subcohorts accounting for within-beneficiary correlations. The most common PIMs that were discontinued after CMR were reported.

RESULTS

We matched 24,368 CMR recipients to 24,368 CMR non-recipients during the observation period. Median age was 74-75, 35% were males, most were White beneficiaries (86%-87%), and the median number of PIMs was 1. In adjusted analyses, CMR receipt was positively associated with PIM discontinuation (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.20-1.32). There was no evidence of differential impact of CMR by race or ethnicity. The PIMs most commonly discontinued after CMR were glimepiride, zolpidem, digoxin, amitriptyline, and nitrofurantoin.

CONCLUSIONS

Among Medicare beneficiaries who are using a PIM, CMR receipt was associated with PIM discontinuation, suggesting that greater CMR use could facilitate PIM reduction for all racial and ethnic groups.

Receipt of Diabetes Specialty Care and Management Services by Older Adults With Diabetes in the U.S., 2015-2019: An Analysis of Medicare Fee-for-Service Claims

OBJECTIVE

We characterized the receipt of diabetes specialty care and management services among older adults with diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Using a 20% random sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years, we analyzed cohorts of type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) with history of severe hypoglycemia (HoH), and all other T2D annually from 2015 to 2019. Outcomes were receipt of office-based endocrinology care, diabetes education, outpatient diabetes health services, excluding those provided in primary care, and any of the aforementioned services.

RESULTS

In the T1D cohort, receipt of endocrinology care and any service increased from 25.9% and 29.2% in 2015 to 32.7% and 37.4% in 2019, respectively. In the T2D with HoH cohort, receipt of endocrinology care and any service was 13.9% and 16.4% in 2015, with minimal increases. Age, race/ethnicity, residential setting, and income were associated with receiving care.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that many older adults may not receive specialty diabetes care and underscore health disparities.

Incorporating Medicare Advantage Admissions Into the CMS Hospital-Wide Readmission Measure

Importance

Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment is rapidly expanding, yet Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) claims-based hospital outcome measures, including readmission rates, have historically included only fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries.

Objective

To assess the outcomes of incorporating MA data into the CMS claims-based FFS Hospital-Wide All-Cause Unplanned Readmission (HWR) measure.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study assessed differences in 30-day unadjusted readmission rates and demographic and risk adjustment variables for MA vs FFS admissions. Inpatient FFS and MA administrative claims data were extracted from the Integrated Data Repository for all admissions for Medicare beneficiaries from July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019. Measure reliability and risk-standardized readmission rates were calculated for the FFS and MA cohort vs the FFS-only cohort, overall and within specialty subgroups (cardiorespiratory, cardiovascular, medicine, surgery, neurology), then changes in hospital performance quintiles were assessed after adding MA admissions.

Main Outcome and Measure

Risk-standardized readmission rates.

Results

The cohort included 11 029 470 admissions (4 077 633 [37.0%] MA; 6 044 060 [54.8%] female; mean [SD] age, 77.7 [8.2] years). Unadjusted readmission rates were slightly higher for MA vs FFS admissions (15.7% vs 15.4%), yet comorbidities were generally lower among MA beneficiaries. Test-retest reliability for the FFS and MA cohort was higher than for the FFS-only cohort (0.78 vs 0.73) and signal-to-noise reliability increased in each specialty subgroup. Mean hospital risk-standardized readmission rates were similar for the FFS and MA cohort and FFS-only cohorts (15.5% vs 15.3%); this trend was consistent across the 5 specialty subgroups. After adding MA admissions to the FFS-only HWR measure, 1489 hospitals (33.1%) had their performance quintile ranking changed. As their proportion of MA admissions increased, more hospitals experienced a change in their performance quintile ranking (147 hospitals [16.3%] in the lowest quintile of percentage MA admissions; 408 [45.3%] in the highest). The combined cohort added 63 hospitals eligible for public reporting and more than 4 million admissions to the measure.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, adding MA admissions to the HWR measure was associated with improved measure reliability and precision and enabled the inclusion of more hospitals and beneficiaries. After MA admissions were included, 1 in 3 hospitals had their performance quintile changed, with the greatest shifts among hospitals with a high percentage of MA admissions.

Long-term outcomes after rehabilitation in Medicare Advantage and fee-for-service beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

Financial incentives in capitated Medicare Advantage (MA) plans may lead to inadequate rehabilitation. We therefore investigated if MA enrollees had worse long-term physical performance and functional outcomes after rehabilitation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries in the nationally representative National Health and Aging Trends Study. We compared MA and fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries reporting rehabilitation between 2014 and 2017 by change in (1) Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and (2) NHATS-derived Functional Independence Measure (FIM) from the previous year, using t-tests incorporating inverse-probability weighting and complex survey design. Secondary outcomes were self-reported: (1) improved function during rehabilitation, (2) worse function since rehabilitation ended, (3) meeting rehabilitation goals, and (4) meeting insurance limits.

RESULTS

Among 738 MA and 1488 FFS participants, weighted mean age was 76 years (SD 7.0), 59% were female, and 9% had probable dementia. MA beneficiaries were more likely to be Black (9% vs. 6%) or Hispanic/other race (15% vs. 10%), be on Medicaid (14% vs. 10%), have lower income (median $35,000 vs. $48,000), and receive <1 month of rehabilitation (30% vs. 23%). MA beneficiaries had a similar decline in SPPB (-0.46 [SD 1.8] vs. -0.21 [SD 2.7], p-value 0.069) and adapted FIM (-1.05 [SD 3.7] vs. -1.13 [SD 5.45], p-value 0.764) compared to FFS. MA beneficiaries were less likely to report improved function during rehabilitation (61% [95% CI 56-67] vs. 70% [95% CI 67-74], p-value 0.006). Other outcomes and analyses restricted to inpatient rehabilitation participants were non-significant.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

MA enrollment was associated with lower likelihood of self-reported functional improvement during rehabilitation but no clinically or statistically significant differences in annual changes of physical performance or function. As MA expands, future studies must monitor implications on rehabilitation coverage and older adults' independence.

Is Electronic Information Exchange Associated With Lower 30-Day Readmission Charges Among Medicare Beneficiaries?

OBJECTIVE

Fragmented readmissions, when admission and readmission occur at different hospitals, are associated with increased charges compared with nonfragmented readmissions. We assessed if hospital participation in health information exchange (HIE) was associated with differences in total charges in fragmented readmissions.

DATA SOURCE

Medicare Fee-for-Service Data, 2018.

STUDY DESIGN

We used generalized linear models with hospital referral region and readmission month fixed effects to assess relationships between information sharing (same HIE, different HIEs, and no HIE available) and total charges of 30-day readmissions among fragmented readmissions; analyses were adjusted for patient-level clinical/demographic characteristics and hospital-level characteristics.

DATA EXTRACTION METHODS

We included beneficiaries with a hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, syncope, urinary tract infection, dehydration, or behavioral issues with a 30-day readmission for any reason.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In all, 279,729 admission-readmission pairs were included, 27% of which were fragmented (n=75,438); average charges of fragmented readmissions were $64,897-$71,606. Compared with fragmented readmissions where no HIE was available, the average marginal effects of same-HIE and different-HIE admission-readmission pairs were -$2329.55 (95% CI: -7333.73, 2674.62) and -$3905.20 (95% CI: -7592.85, -307.54), respectively. While the average marginal effects of different-HIE pairs were lower than those for no-HIE fragmented readmissions, the average marginal effects of same-HIE and different-HIE pairs were not significantly different from each other.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no statistical differences in charges between fragmented readmissions to hospitals that share an HIE or that do not share an HIE compared with hospitals with no HIE available.

Trends in the Characteristics and Outcomes of Older Medicare Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury Treated in Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities: 2013 to 2018

OBJECTIVE

To describe the characteristics and outcomes of older (65+) Medicare beneficiaries with traumatic brain injury (TBI) treated in inpatient rehabilitation facilities between 2013 and 2018.

DESIGN

Descriptive study using IRF Patient Assessment Instrument (IRF-PAI) data reporting trends of the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and outcomes of inpatient rehabilitation facilities Medicare patients with TBI.

SETTING

Inpatient rehabilitation facilities in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

99,804 older Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage patients with TBI (N=99,804).

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Length of stay, self-care, and mobility functional outcomes, discharge destination.

RESULTS

The number of older Medicare beneficiaries with TBI treated in inpatient rehabilitation facilities increased from 14,657 in 2013 to 18,791 in 2018, an increase of 28.2%. In addition to this overall increase in patients, we also found the percentage of men increased slightly (52.9% to 54.8%), there was a higher percentage of patients with tier 3 comorbidities, there was a decrease in the variability of length of stay, there was slightly more self-care and mobility improvement and a slightly higher percentage of patients discharged to the community (67.8% in 2013 and 71.6% in 2018). Newer standardized data showed that prior to the injury, more than one-third used a walker and more than three-quarters had a history of recent falls.

CONCLUSIONS

Between 2013 and 2018, the number of Medicare beneficiaries with TBI treated in IRFs increased by approximately 28%. The characteristics of IRF older patients with TBI changed between 2013 and 2018 toward a slightly higher proportion of men, more comorbidities, and a higher percentage being discharged home after inpatient rehabilitation.

Artificial intelligence in Medicare: utilization, spending, and access to AI-enabled clinical software

OBJECTIVES

In 2018, CMS established reimbursement for the first Medicare-covered artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled clinical software: CT fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) to assist in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. This study quantified Medicare utilization of and spending on FFRCT from 2018 through 2022 and characterized adopting hospitals, clinicians, and patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Analysis, using 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims data, of the hospitals, clinicians, and patients who performed or received coronary CT angiography with or without FFRCT.

METHODS

We measured annual trends in utilization of and spending on FFRCT among hospitals and clinicians from 2018 through 2022. Characteristics of FFRCT-adopting and nonadopting hospitals and clinicians were compared, as well as the characteristics of patients who received FFRCT vs those who did not.

RESULTS

From 2018 to 2022, FFRCT billing volume in Medicare increased more than 11-fold (from 1083 to 12,363 claims). Compared with nonbilling hospitals, FFRCT-billing hospitals were more likely to be larger, part of a health system, nonprofit, and financially profitable. FFRCT-billing clinicians worked in larger group practices and were more likely to be cardiac specialists. FFRCT-receiving patients were more likely to be male and White and less likely to be dually enrolled in Medicaid or receiving disability benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

In the initial 5 years of Medicare reimbursement for FFRCT, growth was concentrated among well-resourced hospitals and clinicians. As Medicare begins to reimburse clinicians for the use of AI-enabled clinical software such as FFRCT, it is crucial to monitor the diffusion of these services to ensure equal access.

Telehealth Expansion and Medicare Beneficiaries' Care Quality and Access

Importance

Understanding the association of telehealth use with health care outcomes is fundamental to determining whether telehealth waivers implemented during the COVID-19 public health emergency should be made permanent. The current literature has yielded inconclusive findings owing to its focus on select states, practices, or health care systems.

Objective

To estimate the association of telehealth use with outcomes for all Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries by comparing hospital service areas (HSAs) with different levels of telehealth use.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This US population-based, retrospective cohort study was conducted from July 2022 to April 2023. Participants included Medicare claims of beneficiaries attributed to HSAs with FFS enrollment in Parts A and B.

Exposures

Low, medium, or high tercile of telehealth use created by ranking HSAs according to the number of telehealth visits per 1000 beneficiaries.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were quality (ambulatory care-sensitive [ACS] hospitalizations and emergency department [ED] visits per 1000 FFS beneficiaries), access to care (clinician encounters per FFS beneficiary), and cost (total cost of care for Part A and/or B services per FFS Medicare beneficiary) determined with a difference-in-difference analysis.

Results

In this cohort study of claims from approximately 30 million Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age in 2019, 71.04 [1.67] years; mean [SD] percentage female in 2019, 53.83% [2.14%]) within 3436 HSAs, between the second half of 2019 and the second half of 2021, mean ACS hospitalizations and ED visits declined sharply, mean clinician encounters per beneficiary declined slightly, and mean total cost of care per beneficiary per semester increased slightly. Compared with the low group, the high group had more ACS hospitalizations (1.63 additional hospitalizations per 1000 beneficiaries; 95% CI, 1.03-2.22 hospitalizations), more clinician encounters (0.30 additional encounters per beneficiary per semester; 95% CI, 0.23-0.38 encounters), and higher total cost of care ($164.99 higher cost per beneficiary per semester; 95% CI, $101.03-$228.96). There was no statistically significant difference in ACS ED visits between the low and high groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries across all 3436 HSAs, high levels of telehealth use were associated with more clinician encounters, more ACS hospitalizations, and higher total health care costs. COVID-19 cases were still high during the period of study, which suggests that these findings partially reflect a higher capacity for providing health services in HSAs with higher telehealth intensity than other HSAs.

Effects of the Million Hearts Model on Myocardial Infarctions, Strokes, and Medicare Spending: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The Million Hearts Model paid health care organizations to assess and reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Model effects on long-term outcomes are unknown.

Objective

To estimate model effects on first-time myocardial infarctions (MIs) and strokes and Medicare spending over a period up to 5 years.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This pragmatic cluster-randomized trial ran from 2017 to 2021, with organizations assigned to a model intervention group or standard care control group. Randomized organizations included 516 US-based primary care and specialty practices, health centers, and hospital-based outpatient clinics participating voluntarily. Of these organizations, 342 entered patients into the study population, which included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 40 to 79 years with no previous MI or stroke and with high or medium CVD risk (a 10-year predicted probability of MI or stroke [ie, CVD risk score] ≥15%) in 2017-2018.

Intervention

Organizations agreed to perform guideline-concordant care, including routine CVD risk assessment and cardiovascular care management for high-risk patients. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services paid organizations to calculate CVD risk scores for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. CMS further rewarded organizations for reducing risk among high-risk beneficiaries (CVD risk score ≥30%).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes included first-time CVD events (MIs, strokes, and transient ischemic attacks) identified in Medicare claims, combined first-time CVD events from claims and CVD deaths (coronary heart disease or cerebrovascular disease deaths) identified using the National Death Index, and Medicare Parts A and B spending for CVD events and overall. Outcomes were measured through 2021.

Results

High- and medium-risk model intervention beneficiaries (n = 130 578) and standard care control beneficiaries (n = 88 286) were similar in age (median age, 72-73 y), sex (58%-59% men), race (7%-8% Black), and baseline CVD risk score (median, 24%). The probability of a first-time CVD event within 5 years was 0.3 percentage points lower for intervention beneficiaries than control beneficiaries (3.3% relative effect; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 [90% CI, 0.93-1.00]; P = .09). The 5-year probability of combined first-time CVD events and CVD deaths was 0.4 percentage points lower in the intervention group (4.2% relative effect; HR, 0.96 [90% CI, 0.93-0.99]; P = .02). Medicare spending for CVD events was similar between the groups (effect estimate, -$1.83 per beneficiary per month [90% CI, -$3.97 to -$0.30]; P = .16), as was overall Medicare spending including model payments (effect estimate, $2.11 per beneficiary per month [90% CI, -$16.66 to $20.89]; P = .85).

Conclusions and Relevance

The Million Hearts Model, which encouraged and paid for CVD risk assessment and reduction, reduced first-time MIs and strokes. Results support guidelines to use risk scores for CVD primary prevention.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04047147.

Prescription Drug Spending in Fee-for-Service Medicare, 2008-2019

IMPORTANCE

Prescription drug spending is a topic of increased interest to the public and policymakers. However, prior assessments have been limited by focusing on retail spending (Part D-covered drugs), omitting clinician-administered (Part B-covered) drug spending, or focusing on all fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, regardless of their enrollment into prescription drug coverage.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the proportion of health care spending contributed by prescription drugs and to assess spending for retail and clinician-administered prescriptions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Descriptive, serial, cross-sectional analysis of a 20% random sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries in the United States from 2008 to 2019 who were continuously enrolled in Parts A (hospital), B (medical), and D (prescription drug) benefits, and not in Medicare Advantage.

EXPOSURE

Calendar year.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Net spending on retail (Part D-covered) and clinician-administered (Part B-covered) prescription drugs; prescription drug spending (spending on Part B-covered and Part D-covered drugs) as a percentage of total per-capita health care spending. Measures were adjusted for inflation and for postsale rebates (for Part D-covered drugs).

RESULTS

There were 3 201 284 beneficiaries enrolled in Parts A, B, and D in 2008 and 4 502 718 in 2019. In 2019, beneficiaries had a mean (SD) age of 71.7 (12.0) years, documented sex was female for 57.7%, and 69.5% had no low-income subsidies. Total per-capita spending was $16 345 in 2008 and $20 117 in 2019. Comparing 2008 with 2019, per-capita Part A spending was $7106 (95% CI, $7084-$7128) vs $7120 (95% CI, $7098-$7141), Part B drug spending was $720 (95% CI, $713-$728) vs $1641 (95% CI, $1629-$1653), Part B nondrug spending was $5113 (95% CI, $5105-$5122) vs $6702 (95% CI, $6692-$6712), and Part D net spending was $3122 (95% CI, $3117-$3127) vs $3477 (95% CI, $3466-$3489). The proportion of total annual spending attributed to prescription drugs increased from 24.0% in 2008 to 27.2% in 2019, net of estimated rebates and discounts.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In 2019, spending on prescription drugs represented approximately 27% of total spending among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Part D, even after accounting for postsale rebates.

Trends in US Ambulatory Care Patterns During the COVID-19 Pandemic, 2019-2021

Importance

Following reductions in US ambulatory care early in the pandemic, it remains unclear whether care consistently returned to expected rates across insurance types and services.

Objective

To assess whether patients with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility had significantly lower than expected return to use of ambulatory care rates than patients with commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service insurance.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this retrospective cohort study examining ambulatory care service patterns from January 1, 2019, through February 28, 2021, claims data from multiple US payers were combined using the Milliman MedInsight research database. Using a difference-in-differences design, the extent to which utilization during the pandemic differed from expected rates had the pandemic not occurred was estimated. Changes in utilization rates between January and February 2020 and each subsequent 2-month time frame during the pandemic were compared with the changes in the corresponding months from the year prior. Age- and sex-adjusted Poisson regression models of monthly utilization counts were used, offsetting for total patient-months and stratifying by service and insurance type.

Exposures

Patients with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility compared with patients with commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service insurance, respectively.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Utilization rates per 100 people for 6 services: emergency department, office and urgent care, behavioral health, screening colonoscopies, screening mammograms, and contraception counseling or HIV screening.

Results

More than 14.5 million US adults were included (mean age, 52.7 years; 54.9% women). In the March-April 2020 time frame, the combined use of 6 ambulatory services declined to 67.0% (95% CI, 66.9%-67.1%) of expected rates, but returned to 96.7% (95% CI, 96.6%-96.8%) of expected rates by the November-December 2020 time frame. During the second COVID-19 wave in the January-February 2021 time frame, overall utilization again declined to 86.2% (95% CI, 86.1%-86.3%) of expected rates, with colonoscopy remaining at 65.0% (95% CI, 64.1%-65.9%) and mammography at 79.2% (95% CI, 78.5%-79.8%) of expected rates. By the January-February 2021 time frame, overall utilization returned to expected rates as follows: patients with Medicaid at 78.4% (95% CI, 78.2%-78.7%), Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility at 73.3% (95% CI, 72.8%-73.8%), commercial at 90.7% (95% CI, 90.5%-90.9%), Medicare Advantage at 83.2% (95% CI, 81.7%-82.2%), and Medicare fee-for-service at 82.0% (95% CI, 81.7%-82.2%; P < .001; comparing return to expected utilization rates among patients with Medicaid and Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility, respectively, with each of the other insurance types).

Conclusions and Relevance

Between March 2020 and February 2021, aggregate use of 6 ambulatory care services increased after the preceding decrease in utilization that followed the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the rate of increase in use of these ambulatory care services was significantly lower for participants with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility than for those insured by commercial, Medicare Advantage, or Medicare fee-for-service.

Patient characteristics associated with enrolment under voluntary programs implemented within fee-for-service systems in British Columbia and Quebec: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of information on patient characteristics associated with enrolment under voluntary programs (e.g. incentive payments) implemented within fee-for-service systems. We explored patient characteristics associated with enrolment under these programs in British Columbia and Quebec.

METHODS

We used linked administrative data and a cross-sectional design to compare people aged 40 years or more enrolled under voluntary programs to those who were eligible but not enrolled. We examined 2 programs in Quebec (enrolment of vulnerable patients with qualifying conditions [implemented in 2003] and enrolment of the general population [2009]) and 3 in BC (Chronic disease incentive [2003], Complex care incentive [2007] and enrolment of the general population [A GP for Me, 2013]). We used logistic regression to estimate the odds of enrolment by neighbourhood income, rural versus urban residence, previous treatment for mental illness, previous treatment for substance use disorder and use of health care services before program implementation, controlling for characteristics linked to program eligibility.

RESULTS

In Quebec, we identified 1 569 010 people eligible for the vulnerable enrolment program (of whom 505 869 [32.2%] were enrolled within the first 2 yr of program implementation) and 2 394 923 for the general enrolment program (of whom 352 380 [14.7%] were enrolled within the first 2 yr). In BC, we identified 133 589 people eligible for the Chronic disease incentive, 47 619 for the Complex care incentive and 1 349 428 for A GP for Me; of these, 60 764 (45.5%), 28 273 (59.4%) and 1 066 714 (79.0%), respectively, were enrolled within the first 2 years. The odds of enrolment were higher in higher-income neighbourhoods for programs without enrolment criteria (adjusted odds ratio [OR] comparing highest to lowest quintiles 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20-1.23] in Quebec and 1.67 [95% CI 1.64-1.69] in BC) but were similar across neighbourhood income quintiles for programs with health-related eligibility criteria. The odds of enrolment by urban versus rural location varied by program. People treated for substance use disorders had lower odds of enrolment in all programs (adjusted OR 0.60-0.72). Compared to people eligible but not enrolled, those enrolled had similar or higher numbers of primary care visits and longitudinal continuity of care in the year before enrolment.

INTERPRETATION

People living in lower-income neighbourhoods and those treated for substance use disorders were less likely than people in higher-income neighbourhoods and those not treated for such disorders to be enrolled in programs without health-related eligibility criteria. Other strategies are needed to promote equitable access to primary care.

Physician Practice Interruptions in the Treatment of Medicare Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic

This study uses Medicare data to assess physician practice interruptions during the 2019-2020 period of the COVID-19 pandemic and provides preliminary evidence on whether those interruptions suggest early retirements or exit from medical practice.

The effects of vertically integrated care on health care use and outcomes in inpatient rehabilitation facilities

OBJECTIVE

To understand the effects of receiving vertically integrated care in inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) on health care use and outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

Medicare enrollment, claims, and IRF patient assessment data from 2012 to 2014.

STUDY DESIGN

We estimated within-IRF differences in health care use and outcomes between IRF patients admitted from hospitals vertically integrated with the IRF (parent hospital) vs patients admitted from other hospitals. For hospital-based IRFs, the parent hospital was defined as the hospital that owned the IRF and co-located with the IRF. For freestanding IRFs, the parent hospital(s) was defined as the hospital(s) that was in the same health system. We estimated models for freestanding and hospital-based IRFs and for fee-for-service (FFS) and Medicare Advantage (MA) patients. Dependent variables included hospital and IRF length of stay, functional status, discharged to home, and hospital readmissions.

DATA EXTRACTION METHODS

We identified Medicare beneficiaries discharged from a hospital to IRF.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In adjusted models with hospital fixed effects, our results indicate that FFS patients in hospital-based IRFs discharged from the parent hospital had shorter hospital (-0.7 days, 95% CI: -0.9 to -0.6) and IRF (-0.7 days, 95% CI: -0.9 to -0.6) length of stay were less likely to be readmitted (-1.6%, 95% CI: -2.7% to -0.5%) and more likely to be discharged to home care (1.4%, 95% CI: 0.7% to 2.0%), without worse patient clinical outcomes, compared to patients discharged from other hospitals and treated in the same IRFs. We found similar results for MA patients. However, for patients in freestanding IRFs, we found little differences in health care use or patient outcomes between patients discharged from a parent hospital compared to patients from other hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that receiving vertically integrated care in hospital-based IRFs shortens institutional length of stay while maintaining or improving health outcomes.

Assessing the downstream value of first-line cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) imaging using real world Medicare fee-for-service claims data

BACKGROUND

Higher imaging quality makes cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) desirable for evaluation of suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). High cost of PET imaging may be offset by reduced utilization and/or improved outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study utilized Medicare fee-for-service dataset. Study participants had no CAD diagnosis within 1 year prior to initial imaging. The PET group (PET imaging) and propensity score matched comparison group (single photon emission computed tomography or stress echocardiography) underwent index imaging between January 2014 and December 2016. Outcomes were analyzed using generalized linear models.

RESULTS

Among 144,503 study subjects, 4619 (3.2%) had PET and 139,884 (96.8%) had conventional imaging. After matching, each group had 4619 patients (mean age 74 years, 59% female). The PET group had lower radiation exposure (3.8 milliSievert less per year, 95% CI - 3.96 to - 3.64, P < .0001) and unstable coronary syndrome (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.94, P = .008). The PET group experienced more hospital admissions (IRR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15, P < .0001), more use of percutaneous coronary intervention (IRR 1.24, 95% CI 1.02-1.50, P = 0.03), while similar mortality rate (hazard ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.78-1.14, P = 0.55). The PET group had higher medical spending ($2358.2 vs $1774.3, difference = $583.9 per patient per month, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

First-line PET imaging was not associated with reduced levels of utilization and spending. Clinical outcomes were mostly similar.

Primary care physicians' perceptions of the role of alternative payment models in recruitment and retention in rural Alberta: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Despite well-documented challenges in recruiting physicians to rural practice, few Canadian studies have described the role physician payment models may play in attracting and retaining physicians to rural practice. This study examined the perspectives of rural primary care physicians on the factors that attract and retain physicians in rural locations, including the role that alternative payment models (APMs) might play.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study involving in-depth, open-ended interviews with rural primary care physicians practising under fee-for-service (FFS) models and APMs in Alberta, Canada. Participants were recruited from the Rural Health Professions Action Plan member list (consisting of physicians practising in rural or remote locations in Alberta) and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta online database. Interviews were conducted April to June 2020, and data were analyzed using a thematic framework approach.

RESULTS

Fourteen physicians were interviewed. There were 5 themes identified: factors that attract physicians to rural practice, barriers and challenges associated with rural practice, the potential role of APMs in recruitment and retention, factors that physicians consider in deciding to change payment models, and physician perceptions of APMs compared with FFS models. Participants expressed that APMs may have some role to play in retaining rural physicians but identified professional challenges, and family-related and personal factors as key determinants. Most FFS physicians indicated that they were interested in exploring APMs provided specific concerns were addressed (e.g., clear and adequately compensated APM contracts, and physician involvement in the development of APMs).

INTERPRETATION

Primary care physicians practising in rural regions in Alberta view payment models as one consideration among many in their decision to pursue rural practice. Alternative payment model contracts designed with the input of physicians may have a role to play in attracting and retaining physicians to rural practice.

What Is the Value of Undergoing Surgery for Spinal Metastases at Dedicated Cancer Centers?

BACKGROUND

The Alliance of Dedicated Cancer Centers is an organization of 11 leading cancer institutions and affiliated hospitals that are exempt from the Medicare prospective system hospital reimbursement policies. Because of their focus on cancer care and participation in innovative cancer treatment methods and protocols, these hospitals are reimbursed based on their actual billings. The perceived lack of incentive to meet a predetermined target price and reduce costs has spurred criticism of the value of cancer care at these institutions. The rationale of our study was to better understand whether dedicated cancer centers (DCCs) deliver high-value care for patients undergoing surgical treatment of spinal metastases.

QUESTION/PURPOSE

Is there a difference in 90-day complications and reimbursements between patients undergoing surgical treatment (decompression or fusion) for spinal metastases at DCCs and those treated at nonDCC hospitals?

METHODS

The 2005 to 2014 100% Medicare Standard Analytical Files database was queried using ICD-9 procedure and diagnosis codes to identify patients undergoing decompression (03.0, 03.09, and 03.4) and/or fusion (81.0X) for spinal metastases (198.5). The database does not allow us to exclude the possibility that some patients were treated with fusion for stabilization of the spine without decompression, although this is likely an uncommon event. Patients undergoing vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty for metastatic disease were excluded. The Medicare hospital provider identification numbers were used to identify the 11 DCCs. The study cohort was categorized into two groups: DCCs and nonDCCs. Although spinal metastases are known to occur among nonMedicare and younger patients, the payment policies of these DCCs are only applicable to Medicare beneficiaries. Therefore, to keep the study objective relevant to current policy and value-based discussions, we performed the analysis using the Medicare dataset. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included 17,776 patients in the study, 6% (1138 of 17,776) of whom underwent surgery at one of the 11 DCCs. Compared with the nonDCC group, DCC group hospitals operated on a younger patient population and on more patients with primary renal cancers. In addition, DCCs were more likely to be high-volume facilities with National Cancer Institute designations and have a voluntary or government ownership model. Patients undergoing surgery for spinal metastases at DCCs were more likely to have spinal decompression with fusion than those at nonDCCs (40% versus 22%; p < 0.001) and had a greater length and extent of fusion (at least four levels of fusion; 34% versus 29%; p = 0.001). Patients at DCCs were also more likely than those at nonDCCs to receive postoperative adjunct treatments such as radiation (16% versus 13.5%; p = 0.008) and chemotherapy (17% versus 9%; p < 0.001), although this difference is small and we do not know if this meets a minimum clinically important difference. To account for differences in patients presenting at both types of facilities, multivariate logistic regression mixed-model analyses were used to compare rates of 90-day complications and 90-day mortality between DCC and nonDCC hospitals. Controls were implemented for baseline clinical characteristics, procedural factors, and hospital-level factors (such as random effects). Generalized linear regression mixed-modeling was used to evaluate differences in total 90-day reimbursements between DCCs and nonDCCs.

RESULTS

After adjusting for differences in baseline demographics, procedural factors, and hospital-level factors, patients undergoing surgery at DCCs had lower odds of experiencing sepsis (6.5% versus 10%; odds ratio 0.54 [95% confidence interval 0.40 to 0.74]; p < 0.001), urinary tract infections (19% versus 28%; OR 0.61 [95% CI 0.50 to 0.74]; p < 0.001), renal complications (9% versus 13%; OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.42 to 0.72]; p < 0.001), emergency department visits (27% versus 31%; OR 0.78 [95% CI 0.64 to 0.93]; p = 0.01), and mortality (39% versus 49%; OR 0.75 [95% CI 0.62 to 0.89]; p = 0.001) within 90 days of the procedure compared with patients treated at nonDCCs. Undergoing surgery at a DCC (90-day reimbursement of USD 54,588 ± USD 42,914) compared with nonDCCs (90-day reimbursement of USD 49,454 ± USD 38,174) was also associated with reduced 90-day risk-adjusted reimbursements (USD -14,802 [standard error 1362] ; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings, it appears that DCCs offer high-value care, as evidenced by lower complication rates and reduced reimbursements after surgery for spinal metastases. A better understanding of the processes of care adopted at these institutions is needed so that additional cancer centers may also be able to deliver similar care for patients with metastatic spine disease.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Plan Type and Opioid Prescriptions for Children in Medicaid

BACKGROUND

Opioids are generally an inappropriate acute pain management strategy in children, particularly because of the risk for diversion and subsequent misuse and abuse.

OBJECTIVES

To examine associations between Medicaid plan type [coordinated care organization (CCO), managed care (MC), fee-for-service (FFS)] and whether a child received an opioid prescription.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Secondary analysis of Oregon Medicaid data (January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017).

SUBJECTS

Medicaid-enrolled children ages 0-17 (N=200,169).

MEASURES

There were 2 outcomes: whether a child received an opioid prescription from (a) any health provider or (b) from a visit to the dentist. Predictor variables included Medicaid plan type, age, sex, race, and ethnicity.

RESULTS

About 6.7% of children received an opioid from any health provider and 1.2% received an opioid from a dentist visit. Children in a CCO were significantly more likely than children in a MC (P<0.01) or FFS (P=0.02) plan to receive an opioid from any health provider. Children in a CCO were also significantly more likely than children in MC or FFS to receive an opioid from a dentist visit (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric opioid prescriptions vary by plan type. Future efforts should identify reasons why Medicaid-enrolled children in a CCO plan are more likely to be prescribed opioids.

Mandated Copayment Reductions in Medicare Advantage: Effects on Skilled Nursing Care, Hospitalizations, and Plan Exit

OBJECTIVES

To address concerns that postacute cost-sharing may deter high-need beneficiaries from participating in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have capped cost-sharing for skilled nursing facility (SNF) services in MA plans since 2011. This study examines whether SNF use, inpatient use, and plan disenrollment changed following stricter regulations in 2015 that required most MA plans to eliminate or substantially reduce cost-sharing for SNF care.

DESIGN

Difference-in-differences retrospective analysis from 2013 to 2016.

SETTING

MA plans.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-one million MA members in 320 plans with mandatory cost-sharing reductions and 261 plans without such reductions.

MEASUREMENTS

Mean monthly number of SNF admissions, SNF days, hospitalizations, and plan disenrollees per 1000 members.

RESULTS

Mean total cost-sharing for the first 20 days of SNF services decreased from $911 to $104 in affected plans. Relative to concurrent changes in plans without mandated cost-sharing reductions, plans with mandatory cost-sharing reductions experienced no significant differences in the number of SNF days per 1000 members (adjusted between-group difference: 0.4 days per 1000 members [95% confidence interval (95% CI), -5.2 to 6.0, P=0.89], small decreases in the number of hospitalizations per 1000 members [adjusted between-group difference: 0.6 admissions per 1000 members (95% CI, -1.0 to -0.1; P=0.03)], and small decreases in the number of SNF users who disenrolled at year-end [adjusted between-group difference: -16.8 disenrollees per 1000 members (95% CI, -31.9 to -1.8; P=0.03)].

CONCLUSIONS

Mandated reductions in SNF cost-sharing may have curbed selective disenrollment from MA plans without significantly increasing use of SNF services.

Patient Experiences of Integrated Care in Medicare Accountable Care Organizations and Medicare Advantage Versus Traditional Fee-for-Service

BACKGROUND

Health insurance design can influence the extent to which clinical care is well-coordinated. Through alternative payment models, Medicare Advantage (MA) and Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) have the potential to improve integration relative to traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize patient experiences of integrated care within Medicare and identify whether MA or ACO beneficiaries perceive greater integration than FFS beneficiaries.

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the 2015 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey.

SUBJECTS

Nationally representative sample of 11,978 Medicare beneficiaries.

MEASURES

Main outcomes included 8 previously derived domains of patient-perceived integrated care (PPIC), measured on a scale of 1-4.

RESULTS

The final sample was 55% female with a mean (SD) age of 71.1 (11.3). In unadjusted analyses, we observed considerable variation across PPIC domains in the full sample, but little variation across subsamples defined by coverage type within a given PPIC domain. In linear models adjusting for a rich set of patient characteristics, we observe no significant benefits of ACOs nor MA relative to FFS, a finding which is robust to alternative specifications and adjustment for multiple comparisons. We similarly observed no benefits in subgroup analyses restricted to states with relatively high market penetration of ACOs or MA.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite characteristics of ACOs and MA that theoretically promote integrated care, we find that PPIC is largely similar across coverage types in Medicare.

Medical expenditures for hypertensive disorders during pregnancy that resulted in a live birth among privately insured women

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the excess maternal health services utilization and direct maternal medical expenditures associated with hypertensive disorders during pregnancy and one year postpartum among women with private insurance in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN

We used 2008-2014 IBM MarketScan® Commercial Databases to identify women aged 15-44 who had a pregnancy resulting in live birth during 1/1/09-12/31/13 and were continuously enrolled with non-capitated or partially capitated coverage from 12 months before pregnancy through 12 months after delivery. Hypertensive disorders identified by diagnosis codes were categorized into three mutually exclusive types: preeclampsia and eclampsia, chronic hypertension, and gestational hypertension. Multivariate negative binomial and generalized linear models were used to estimate service utilization and expenditures, respectively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Per person excess health services utilization and medical expenditures during pregnancy and one year postpartum associated with hypertensive disorders (in 2014 US dollars).

RESULTS

Women with preeclampsia and eclampsia, chronic hypertension, and gestational hypertension had $9,389, $6,041, and $2,237 higher mean medical expenditures compared to women without hypertensive disorders ($20,252), respectively (ps < 0.001). One-third (36%) of excess expenditure associated with hypertensive disorders during pregnancy was attributable to outpatient services.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertensive disorders during pregnancy were associated with significantly higher health services utilization and medical expenditures among privately insured women with hypertensive disorders. Medical expenditures varied by types of hypertensive disorders. Stakeholders can use this information to assess the potential economic benefits of interventions that prevent these conditions or their complications.

Payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings

BACKGROUND

Changes to the method of payment for healthcare providers, including pay-for-performance schemes, are increasingly being used by governments, health insurers, and employers to help align financial incentives with health system goals. In this review we focused on changes to the method and level of payment for all types of healthcare providers in outpatient healthcare settings. Outpatient healthcare settings, broadly defined as 'out of hospital' care including primary care, are important for health systems in reducing the use of more expensive hospital services.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of different payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings on the quantity and quality of health service provision, patient outcomes, healthcare provider outcomes, cost of service provision, and adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase (searched 5 March 2019), and several other databases. In addition, we searched clinical trials platforms, grey literature, screened reference lists of included studies, did a cited reference search for included studies, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. We screened records from an updated search in August 2020, with any potentially relevant studies categorised as awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, and repeated measures studies that compared different payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient care settings.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We conducted a structured synthesis. We first categorised the payment methods comparisons and outcomes, and then described the effects of different types of payment methods on different outcome categories. Where feasible, we used meta-analysis to synthesise the effects of payment interventions under the same category. Where it was not possible to perform meta-analysis, we have reported means/medians and full ranges of the available point estimates. We have reported the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the relative difference (as per cent change or mean difference (MD)) for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 studies in the review: 12 randomised trials, 13 controlled before-and-after studies, one interrupted time series, and one repeated measure study. Most healthcare providers were primary care physicians. Most of the payment methods were implemented by health insurance schemes in high-income countries, with only one study from a low- or middle-income country. The included studies were categorised into four groups based on comparisons of different payment methods. (1) Pay for performance (P4P) plus existing payment methods compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings P4P incentives probably improve child immunisation status (RR 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.36; 3760 patients; moderate-certainty evidence) and may slightly increase the number of patients who are asked more detailed questions on their disease by their pharmacist (MD 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.54; 454 patients; low-certainty evidence). P4P may slightly improve primary care physicians' prescribing of guideline-recommended antihypertensive medicines compared with an existing payment method (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12; 362 patients; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effects of extra P4P incentives on mean blood pressure reduction for patients and costs for providing services compared with an existing payment method (very low-certainty evidence). Outcomes related to workload or other health professional outcomes were not reported in the included studies. One randomised trial found that compared to the control group, the performance of incentivised professionals was not sustained after the P4P intervention had ended. (2) Fee for service (FFS) compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings We are uncertain about the effect of FFS on the quantity of health services delivered (outpatient visits and hospitalisations), patient health outcomes, and total drugs cost compared to an existing payment method due to very low-certainty evidence. The quality of service provision and health professional outcomes were not reported in the included studies. One randomised trial reported that physicians paid via FFS may see more well patients than salaried physicians (low-certainty evidence), possibly implying that more unnecessary services were delivered through FFS. (3) FFS mixed with existing payment methods compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings FFS mixed payment method may increase the quantity of health services provided compared with an existing payment method (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.76; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of FFS mixed payment on quality of services provided, patient health outcomes, and health professional outcomes compared with an existing payment method due to very low-certainty evidence. Cost outcomes and adverse effects were not reported in the included studies. (4) Enhanced FFS compared with FFS for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings Enhanced FFS (higher FFS payment) probably increases child immunisation rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.48; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether higher FFS payment results in more primary care visits and about the effect of enhanced FFS on the net expenditure per year on covered children with regular FFS (very low-certainty evidence). Quality of service provision, patient outcomes, health professional outcomes, and adverse effects were not reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings, P4P or an increase in FFS payment level probably increases the quantity of health service provision (moderate-certainty evidence), and P4P may slightly improve the quality of service provision for targeted conditions (low-certainty evidence). The effects of changes in payment methods on health outcomes is uncertain due to very low-certainty evidence. Information to explore the influence of specific payment method design features, such as the size of incentives and type of performance measures, was insufficient. Furthermore, due to limited and very low-certainty evidence, it is uncertain if changing payment models without including additional funding for professionals would have similar effects. There is a need for further well-conducted research on payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings in low- and middle-income countries; more studies comparing the impacts of different designs of the same payment method; and studies that consider the unintended consequences of payment interventions.