Going Beyond Clinical Care to Reduce Health Care Spending: Findings From the J-CHiP Community-based Population Health Management Program Evaluation

Hospital Partnerships for Population Health: A Systematic Review of the Literature

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The U.S. healthcare system continues to experience high costs and suboptimal health outcomes that are largely influenced by social determinants of health. National policies such as the Affordable Care Act and value-based payment reforms incentivize healthcare systems to engage in strategies to improve population health. Healthcare systems are increasingly expanding or developing new partnerships with community-based organizations to support these efforts. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature in the United States to identify examples of hospital-community partnerships; the main purposes or goals of partnerships; study designs used to assess partnerships; and potential outcomes (e.g., process- or health-related) associated with partnerships. Using robust keyword searches and a thorough reference review, we identified 37 articles published between January 2008 and December 2019 for inclusion. Most studies employed descriptive study designs (n = 21); health needs assessments were the most common partnership focus (n = 15); and community/social service (n = 21) and public health organizations (n = 15) were the most common partner types. Qualitative findings suggest hospital-community partnerships hold promise for breaking down silos, improving communication across sectors, and ensuring appropriate interventions for specific populations. Few studies in this review reported quantitative findings. In those that did, results were mixed, with the strongest support for improvements in measures of hospitalizations. This review provides an initial synthesis of hospital partnerships to address population health and presents valuable insights to hospital administrators, particularly those leading population health efforts.

Evaluation of a National Care Coordination Program to Reduce Utilization Among High-cost, High-need Medicaid Beneficiaries With Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Medical, behavioral, and social determinants of health are each associated with high levels of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate a care coordination program designed to provide combined "whole-person care," integrating medical, behavioral, and social support for high-cost, high-need Medicaid beneficiaries by targeting access barriers and social determinants.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Individual-level interrupted time series with a comparator group, using person-month as the unit of analysis.

SUBJECTS

A total of 42,214 UnitedHealthcare Medicaid beneficiaries (194,834 person-months) age 21 years or above with diabetes, with Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, Medicaid expansion, Supplemental Security Income without Medicare, or dual Medicaid/Medicare.

MEASURES

Our outcome measures were any hospitalizations and any ED visits in a given month. Covariates of interest included an indicator for intervention versus comparator group and indicator and spline variables measuring changes in an outcome's time trend after program enrollment.

RESULTS

Overall, 6 of the 8 examined comparisons were not statistically significant. Among Supplemental Security Income beneficiaries, we observed a larger projected decrease in ED visit risk among the intervention sample versus the comparator sample at 12 months postenrollment (difference-in-difference: -6.6%; 95% confidence interval: -11.2%, -2.1%). Among expansion beneficiaries, we observed a greater decrease in hospitalization risk among the intervention sample versus the comparator sample at 12 months postenrollment (difference-in-difference: -5.8%; 95% confidence interval: -11.4%, -0.2%).

CONCLUSION

A care coordination program designed to reduce utilization among high-cost, high-need Medicaid beneficiaries was associated with fewer ED visits and hospitalizations for patients with diabetes in selected Medicaid programs but not others.

Evolving Models of Integrated Behavioral Health and Primary Care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Mental and physical disorders commonly co-occur leading to higher morbidity and mortality in people with mental and substance use disorders (collectively called behavioral health disorders). Models to integrate primary and behavioral health care for this population have not yet been implemented widely across health systems, leading to efforts to adapt models for specific subpopulations and mechanisms to facilitate more widespread adoption.

RECENT FINDINGS

Using examples from the UK and USA, we describe recent advances to integrate behavioral and primary care for new target populations including people with serious mental illness, people at the extremes of life, and for people with substance use disorders. We summarize mechanisms to incentivize integration efforts and to stimulate new integration between health and social services in primary care. We then present an outline of recent enablers for integration, concentrating on changes to funding mechanisms, developments in quality outcome measurements to promote collaborative working, and pragmatic guidance aimed at primary care providers wishing to enhance provision of behavioral care. Integrating care between primary care and behavioral health services is a complex process. Established models of integrated care are now being tailored to target specific patient populations and policy initiatives developed to encourage adoption in particular settings. Wholly novel approaches to integrate care are significantly less common. Future efforts to integrate care should allow for flexibility and innovation around implementation, payment models that support delivery of high value care, and the development of outcome measures that incentivize collaborative working practices.

Association of a Care Coordination Model With Health Care Costs and Utilization: The Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP)

IMPORTANCE

The Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership was created to improve care coordination across the continuum in East Baltimore, Maryland.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership (J-CHiP) was associated with improved outcomes and lower spending.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Nonrandomized acute care intervention (ACI) and community intervention (CI) Medicare and Medicaid participants were analyzed in a quality improvement study using difference-in-differences designs with propensity score-weighted and matched comparison groups. The study spanned 2012 to 2016 and took place in acute care hospitals, primary care clinics, skilled nursing facilities, and community-based organizations. The ACI analysis compared outcomes of participants in Medicare and Medicaid during their 90-day postacute episode with those of a propensity score-weighted preintervention group at Johns Hopkins Community Health Partnership hospitals and a concurrent comparison group drawn from similar Maryland hospitals. The CI analysis compared changes in outcomes of Medicare and Medicaid participants with those of a propensity score-matched comparison group of local residents.

INTERVENTIONS

The ACI bundle aimed to improve transition planning following discharge. The CI included enhanced care coordination and integrated behavioral support from local primary care sites in collaboration with community-based organizations.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Utilization measures of hospital admissions, 30-day readmissions, and emergency department visits; quality of care measures of potentially avoidable hospitalizations, practitioner follow-up visits; and total cost of care (TCOC) for Medicare and Medicaid participants.

RESULTS

The CI group had 2154 Medicare beneficiaries (1320 [61.3%] female; mean age, 69.3 years) and 2532 Medicaid beneficiaries (1483 [67.3%] female; mean age, 55.1 years). For the CI group's Medicaid participants, aggregate TCOC reduction was $24.4 million, and reductions of hospitalizations, emergency department visits, 30-day readmissions, and avoidable hospitalizations were 33, 51, 36, and 7 per 1000 beneficiaries, respectively. The ACI group had 26 144 beneficiary-episodes for Medicare (13 726 [52.5%] female patients; mean patient age, 68.4 years) and 13 921 beneficiary-episodes for Medicaid (7392 [53.1%] female patients; mean patient age, 52.2 years). For the ACI group's Medicare participants, there was a significant reduction in aggregate TCOC of $29.2 million with increases in 90-day hospitalizations and 30-day readmissions of 11 and 14 per 1000 beneficiary-episodes, respectively, and reduction in practitioner follow-up visits of 41 and 29 per 1000 beneficiary-episodes for 7-day and 30-day visits, respectively. For the ACI group's Medicaid participants, there was a significant reduction in aggregate TCOC of $59.8 million and the 90-day emergency department visit rate decreased by 133 per 1000 episodes, but hospitalizations increased by 49 per 1000 episodes and practitioner follow-up visits decreased by 70 and 182 per 1000 episodes for 7-day and 30-day visits, respectively. In total, the CI and ACI were associated with $113.3 million in cost savings.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

A care coordination model consisting of complementary bundled interventions in an urban academic environment was associated with lower spending and improved health outcomes.