Going Beyond One Size Fits All in Surgical Bundled Payments

Disparate Access to Surgery for Operable Carcinoma of the Lung in North Carolina

PURPOSE

Disparities in access to surgical care are associated with poorer outcomes in patients with cancer. We sought to determine whether vulnerable populations undergo an expected rate of surgery for Stage I-IIIA lung cancer in North Carolina (NC).

METHODS

We calculated the proportional surgical ratio (PSR) to identify a potential disparity in surgery rates for early stage (I-IIIA) lung cancer, first in the five counties with the worst health outcomes (LRC) and subsequently the entire state. The reference was the five healthiest counties (HRC), initially, and then the single county with the best health outcomes.

RESULTS

In 2016, 3,452 individuals with Stage I-IIIA lung cancer were diagnosed in NC of which 246,854 resided in LRC, whereas 1,865,588 resided in HRC. A total of 453 operable lung cancers were diagnosed in the HRC and 107 in the LRC. The observed lobectomy rate in HRC was 40.1% (range 20.2-58.3%) of early-stage lung cancer and 19% (range 12-36%) for LRC. The PSR was 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.35, 0.90). For all 99 counties across NC, the PSR ranged from 0.33 to 0.96 (mean = 0.49, standard deviation [SD] = 0.10). In a multivariable model, only other primary care provider ratio (relative rate per 100 increase = 0.997; 95% CI = 0.994, 0.999) was significantly associated with PSR.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals residing in LRC in NC are 42% less likely to undergo surgery for operable lung cancer than patients living in HRC. Understanding how factors impact access is key to designing informed interventions.

Lessons learned from value-based pediatric appendectomy care: A shared savings pilot model

PURPOSE

We aim to assess the healthcare value achieved from a shared savings program for pediatric appendectomy.

METHODS

All appendectomy patients covered by our health plan were included. Quality targets were 15% reduction in time to surgery, length of stay, readmission rate, and patient satisfaction. Quality targets and costs for an appendectomy episode in two 6-month performance periods (PP1, PP2) were compared to baseline.

RESULTS

640 patients were included (baseline:317, PP1:167, PP2:156). No quality targets were met in PP1. Two quality targets were met during PP2: readmission rate (-57%) and patient satisfaction. No savings were realized because the cost reduction threshold (-9%) was not met during PP1 (+1.7%) or PP2 (-0.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Payer-provider partnerships can be a platform for testing value-based reimbursement models. Setting achievable targets, identifying affectable quality metrics, considering case mix index, and allowing sufficient time for interventions to generate cost savings should be considered in future programs.