Physicians' Participation In ACOs Is Lower In Places With Vulnerable Populations Than In More Affluent Communities

Association between mandatory bundled payments and changes in socioeconomic disparities for joint replacement outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether mandatory participation by hospitals in bundled payments for lower extremity joint replacement (LEJR) was associated with changes in outcome disparities for patients dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

We used Medicare claims data for beneficiaries undergoing LEJR in the United States between 2011 and 2017.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective observational study using a differences-in-differences method to compare changes in outcome disparities between dual-eligible and non-dual eligible beneficiaries after hospital participation in the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) program. The primary outcome was LEJR complications. Secondary outcomes included 90-day readmissions and mortality.

DATA EXTRACTION METHODS

We identified hospitals in the US market areas eligible for CJR. We included beneficiaries in the intervention group who received joint replacement at hospitals in markets randomized to participate in CJR. The comparison group included patients who received joint replacement at hospitals in markets who were eligible for CJR but randomized to control.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The study included 1,603,555 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age, 74.6 years, 64.3% women, 11.0% dual-eligible). Among participant hospitals, complications decreased between baseline and intervention periods from 11.0% to 10.1% for dual-eligible and 7.0% to 6.4% for non-dual-eligible beneficiaries. Among nonparticipant hospitals, complications decreased from 10.3% to 9.8% for dual-eligible and 6.7% to 6.0% for non-dual-eligible beneficiaries. In adjusted analysis, CJR participation was associated with a reduced difference in complications between dual-eligible and non-dual-eligible beneficiaries (-0.9 percentage points, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.1). The reduction in disparities was observed among hospitals without prior experience in a voluntary LEJR bundled payment model. There were no differential changes in 90-day readmissions or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Mandatory participation in a bundled payment program was associated with reduced disparities in joint replacement complications for Medicare beneficiaries with low income. To our knowledge, this is the first evidence of reduced socioeconomic disparities in outcomes under value-based payments.

Differential Hospital Participation in Bundled Payments in Communities with Higher Shares of Marginalized Populations

BACKGROUND

Medicare's voluntary bundled payment programs have demonstrated generally favorable results. However, it remains unknown whether uneven hospital participation in these programs in communities with greater shares of minorities and patients of low socioeconomic status results in disparate access to practice redesign innovations.

OBJECTIVE

Examine whether communities with higher proportions of marginalized individuals were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced (BPCI-Advanced).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using ordinary least squares regression controlling for patient and community factors.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicare fee-for-service patients enrolled from 2015-2017 (pre-BPCI-Advanced) and residing in 2,058 local communities nationwide defined by Hospital Service Areas (HSAs). Each community's share of marginalized patients was calculated separately for each of the share of beneficiaries of Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, or dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid.

MAIN MEASURES

Dichotomous variable indicating whether a given community had at least one hospital that ever participated in BPCI-Advanced from 2018-2022.

KEY RESULTS

Communities with higher shares of dual-eligible individuals were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced than communities with the lowest quartile of dual-eligible individuals (Q4: -15.1 percentage points [pp] lower than Q1, 95% CI: -21.0 to -9.1, p < 0.001). There was no consistent significant relationship between community proportion of Black beneficiaries and likelihood of having a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced. Communities with higher shares of Hispanic beneficiaries were more likely to have a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced than those in the lowest quartile (Q4: 19.2 pp higher than Q1, 95% CI: 13.4 to 24.9, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Communities with greater shares of dual-eligible beneficiaries, but not racial or ethnic minorities, were less likely to be served by a hospital participating in BPCI-Advanced Policymakers should consider approaches to incentivize more socioeconomically uniform participation in voluntary bundled payments.

Measuring value in health care: lessons from accountable care organizations

Accountable care organizations (ACOs) were created to promote health care value by improving health outcomes while curbing health care expenditures. Although a decade has passed, the value of care delivered by ACOs is yet to be fully understood. We proposed a novel measure of health care value using data envelopment analysis and examined its association with ACO organizational characteristics and social determinants of health (SDOH). We observed that the value of care delivered by ACOs stagnated in recent years, which may be partially attributed to challenges in care continuity and coordination across providers. ACOs that were solely led by physicians and included more participating entities exhibited lower value, highlighting the role of coordination across ACO networks. Furthermore, SDOH factors, such as economic well-being, healthy food consumption, and access to health resources, were significant predictors of ACO value. Our findings suggest a "skinny in scale, broad in scope" approach for ACOs to improve the value of care. Health care policy should also incentivize ACOs to work with local communities and enhance care coordination of vulnerable patient populations across siloed and disparate care delivery systems.

The role of payment and financing in achieving health equity

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to identify healthcare payment and financing reforms to promote health equity and ways that the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) may promote those reforms.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

AHRQ convened a payment and financing workgroup-the authors of this paper-as part of its Health Equity Summit held in July 2022. This workgroup drew from its collective experience with healthcare payment and financing reform, as well as feedback from participants in a session at the Health Equity Summit, to identify the evidence base and promising paths for reforms to promote health equity.

STUDY DESIGN

The payment and financing workgroup developed an outline of reforms to promote health equity, presented the outline to participants in the payment and financing session of the July 2022 AHRQ Health Equity Summit, and integrated feedback from the participants.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

This paper did not require novel data collection; the authors collected the data from the existing evidence base.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The paper outlines root causes of health inequity and corresponding potential reforms in five domains: (1) the differential distribution of resources between healthcare providers serving different communities, (2) scarcity of financing for populations most in need, (3) lack of integration/accountability, (4) patient cost barriers to care, and (5) bias in provider behavior and diagnostic tools.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional research is necessary to determine whether the proposed reforms are effective in promoting health equity.

Risk Selection and Care Fragmentation at Medicare Accountable Care Organizations for Patients With Dementia

BACKGROUND

Patients with dementia are a growing and vulnerable population within Medicare. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are becoming Medicare's dominant care model, but ACO enrollment and care patterns for patients with dementia are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare differences in ACO enrollment for patients with versus without dementia, and in risk profiles and ambulatory care among patients with dementia by ACO enrollment status.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Cohort study assessing the relationships between patient dementia, following-year ACO enrollment, and ambulatory care patterns.

SUBJECTS

A total of 13,362 (weighted: 45, 499,049) person-years for patients [2761 (weighted: 6,312,304) for dementia patients] ages 65 years and above in the 2015-2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey.

MEASURES

We assessed differences in ACO enrollment rates for patients with versus without dementia, and in dementia-relevant ambulatory care visit rates and validated care fragmentation indices among patients with dementia by ACO enrollment status.

RESULTS

Patients with versus without dementia were less likely to be enrolled in (38.3% vs. 44.6%, P<0.001), and more likely to exit (21.1% vs. 13.7%, P<0.01) ACOs. Among patients with dementia, those enrolled versus not enrolled in ACOs had a more favorable social and health risk profile on 6 of 16 measures (P<0.05). There were no differences in rates of dementia-relevant, primary, or specialty care visits. ACO enrollment was associated with 45.7% higher wellness visit rates (P<0.001), and 13.4% more fragmented primary care (P<0.01) spread across 8.7% more distinct physicians (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Medicare ACOs are less likely to enroll and retain patients with dementia than other patients and provide more fragmented primary care without providing additional dementia-relevant ambulatory care visits.

A Decade of ACOs in Medicare: Have They Delivered on Their Promise?

Accountable care organizations (ACOs) were envisioned as a way to address both health care cost growth and uneven quality in US health care. They emerged in the early 2000s, with the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA) establishing a Medicare ACO program. In the decade since their launch, ACOs have grown into one of Medicare's flagship payment reform programs, with millions of beneficiaries receiving care from hundreds of ACOs. While great expectations surrounded ACOs' introduction into Medicare, their impacts to date have been modest. ACOs have achieved some savings and improvements in measured quality, but disagreement persists over the meaning of those results: Do ACOs represent important, incremental steps forward on the path toward a more efficient, high-quality health care system? Or do their modest achievements signal a failure of large-scale progress despite the substantial investments of resources? ACOs have proven to be politically resilient, largely sidestepping the controversies and partisan polarization that have led to the demise of other ACA provisions. But the same features that have enabled ACOs to evade backlash have constrained their impacts and effectiveness. After a decade, ACOs' long-term influence on Medicare and the US health care system remains uncertain.

Using a home time measure to differentiate ACO performance for seriously ill populations

BACKGROUND

Alternative Payment Models (APMs) piloted by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) such as ACO Realizing Equity, Access and Community Health (REACH) seek to improve care and quality of life among seriously ill populations (SIP). Days at Home (DAH) was proposed for use in this model to evaluate organizational performance. It is important to assess the utility and feasibility of person-centered outcomes measures, such as DAH, as CMS seeks to advance care models for seriously ill beneficiaries. We leverage existing Accountable Care Organization (ACO) contracts to evaluate the feasibility of ACO-level DAH measure and examine characteristics associated with ACOs with more DAH.

METHODS

We calculated DAH for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 68 and over who were retrospectively attributed to a Medicare ACO between 2014 and 2018 and met the seriously ill criteria. We then aggregated to the ACO level DAH for each ACO's seriously ill beneficiaries and risk-adjusted this aggregated measure. Finally, we evaluated associations between risk-adjusted DAH per person-year and ACO, beneficiary, and market characteristics.

RESULTS

ACOs' seriously ill beneficiaries spent an average of 349.3 risk-adjusted DAH per person-year. Risk-adjusted ACO variation, defined as the interquartile range, was 4.21 days (IQR = 347.32-351.53). Beneficiaries of ACOs are composed of a less racially diverse beneficiary cohort, opting for two-sided risk models, and operating in markets with fewer hospital and Skilled Nursing Facility beds had more DAH.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial variation across ACOs in the DAH measure for seriously ill beneficiaries suggests the measure can differentiate between high and low performing provider groups. Key to the success of the metric is accurate risk adjustment to ensure providers have adequate resources to care for seriously ill beneficiaries. Organizational factors, such as the ACO size and level of risk, are strongly associated with more days at home.

The Proportion of Marginalized Individuals in US Communities and Hospital Participation in Bundled Payments

Hospitals have demonstrated the benefits of both voluntary and mandatory bundled payments for joint replacement surgery. However, given generalizability and disparities concerns, it is critical to understand the availability of care through bundled payments to historically marginalized groups, such as racial and ethnic minorities and individuals with lower socioeconomic status (SES). This cross-sectional analysis of 3880 US communities evaluated the relationship between the proportion of Black and Hispanic individuals (minority share) or Medicare/Medicaid dual-eligible individuals (low SES share) and community-level participation in Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative (BPCI) (being a BPCI community) and Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model (being a CJR community). An increase from the lowest to highest quartile of minority share was not associated with differences in the probability of being a BPCI community (3.5 percentage point [pp] difference, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.2% to 8.3%, P = 0.15), but was associated with a 16.1 pp higher probability of being a CJR community (95% CI 10.3% to 22.0%, P < 0.0001). An increase from the lowest to highest quartile of low SES share was associated with a 6.0 pp lower probability of being a BPCI community (95% CI -10.9% to -1.2%, P = 0.02) and 19.0 pp lower probability of being a CJR community (95% CI -24.9% to -13.0%, P < 0.0001). These findings highlight that the greater the proportion of lower SES individuals in a community, the lower the likelihood that its hospitals participated in either voluntary or mandatory bundled payments. Policymakers should consider community socioeconomic characteristics when designing participation mechanisms for future bundled payment programs.

Trends in Orthopedic Surgeon Practice Consolidation From 2008 to 2019

BACKGROUND

In the past decade, physician practices have merged into larger group practices (ie, horizontal consolidation) and have been acquired by hospitals and health systems (ie, vertical consolidation), leaving fewer practices independent. The implications of these changes can be profound, affecting the prices for and spending on physician services, access to care, patients' choice of providers, and quality of care.

METHODS

We used IQVIA data on orthopedic surgeon practice sites that included information on health system or hospital ownership, group medical practice participation, and average patient volume. We calculated the number and size of group medical practices as measures of horizontal consolidation and the percentage of practice sites owned by a health system or hospital as a measure of vertical consolidation. We also calculated the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index to measure market concentration.

RESULTS

We found significant horizontal and vertical consolidation nationally and across all regions of the United States. This consolidation has led to much more concentrated markets, as measured by Herfindahl-Hirschman Index, for orthopedic surgeon services. These trends are consistent with studies looking at consolidation of other types of providers.

CONCLUSION

Orthopedic surgeon practices, like other provider types, have consolidated at a rapid rate over the past decade. A variety of factors may have contributed, including the move away from fee-for-service to alternative payment arrangements, changes in Medicare payment policies, private equity activity, and evolving physician preferences. Due to the potential impacts of this consolidation, more research is needed to examine some of these contributing factors.

Accountable care organizations and physician antibiotic prescribing behavior

BACKGROUND

Physician accountable care organization (ACO) affiliation has been found to reduce cost and improve quality across metrics that are directly measured by the Medicare ACO programs. However, little is known about potential spillover effects from this program onto non-measured physician behavior such as antibiotic prescribing.

METHODS

Using a two-part structural selection model that accounts for selection into treatment (ACO group), and non-treatment (control group), we compare physician antibiotic prescribing across these groups with adjustment for volume, patient, physician and institutional characteristics. We also estimate heterogeneous treatment responses across specialties, focusing on physicians with a primary specialty of internal medicine, family or general practice, nurse practitioners, as well as general and orthopedic surgeons.

RESULTS

We find that ACO affiliation helps reduce antibiotic prescribing by 20.4 (95%CI = -26.65 to -14.16, p-value<0.001) prescriptions (about 19.5%) per year. We show that each additional hospital and practice affiliation increases prescriptions by 1.6 (95%CI = 1.27 to 1.95, p-value<0.001) and 1.7 (95%CI = 1.00 to 2.47, p-value<0.001), respectively. However, the use of electronic health records and high-quality medical training is associated with a decrease in antibiotic use of 7.9 (95%CI = -8.79 to -7.07, p-value<0.001) and 3.6 (95%CI = -4.47 to -2.73, p-value<0.001) claims, respectively. The treatment effects are found to vary with specialty, where internal medicine physicians experience an average decrease of 23.6 (95%CI = -29.98 to -17.20, p-value<0.001), family and general practice physicians a decrease of 22.1 (95%CI = -28.37 to -15.77, p-value<0.001), nurse practitioners a decrease of 7.1 (95%CI = -13.99 to -0.77, p-value = 0.028), general surgeons a decrease of 9.6 (95%CI = -16.02 to -3.25, p-value = 0.003), and orthopedic surgeons a reduction of 8.1 (95%CI = -14.84 to -1.42, p-value = 0.018) in their antibiotic prescribing per year.

CONCLUSIONS

In assessing the impact of Medicare ACO programs it is important to account for spillover effects. Our study finds that ACO affiliation has had a measurable impact on physician antibiotic prescribing.

ACO Investment Model Produced Savings, But The Majority Of Participants Exited When Faced With Downside Risk

Medicare's Accountable Care Organization (ACO) Investment Model (AIM) provided up-front funding to forty-one small, rurally located ACOs to encourage their participation in the Medicare Shared Savings Program. We estimate net savings to Medicare of $381.5 million over three years, driven by utilization reductions in inpatient and other institutional care and by the absence of shared risk for potential increases in Medicare spending incurred by participants. These savings suggest that population-based payment models can enable providers to better meet the needs of rural populations through greater flexibility in care delivery. However, nearly two-thirds of AIM ACOs exited the Medicare Shared Savings Program when faced with the requirement to assume downside financial risk, starting in year four of participation. As the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services builds on AIM and rural hospital global payment models, our findings suggest that new payment models can support more efficient use of resources to meet the health care needs of rural populations. However, the findings also caution against the vigorous pursuit of savings as a primary goal of payment models in traditionally underserved communities.

Physician Compensation In Physician-Owned And Hospital-Owned Practices

Physician practices are increasingly being acquired by hospitals and health systems. Despite evidence that this type of vertical integration is profitable for hospitals, the association between these acquisitions and the incomes of physicians in the acquired practices is unknown. We combined national survey data on physician practice ownership with data on physician income to examine whether hospital or health system ownership of physician practices was associated with differences in physician income during 2014-18. During the study period, hospital and health system ownership of physician practices increased by 89.2 percent, from 24.1 percent to 45.6 percent of all physicians in our sample. Among physician practices overall, vertical integration with hospitals or health systems was associated with, on average, 0.8 percent lower income compared with independent physicians after multivariable adjustment. In analyses by physician specialty, vertical integration of physician practices with hospitals or health systems was associated with lower income for nonsurgical specialists, no difference in income for primary care physicians, and slightly higher income for surgical specialists. Although vertical integration of physician practices is a rapidly growing trend, physicians might not directly benefit financially.

FQHC Designation and Safety Net Patient Revenue Associated with Primary Care Practice Capabilities for Access and Quality

BACKGROUND

Concerns exist about the ability of safety net health care organizations to participate in US health care reform. Primary care practices are key to several efforts, but little is known about how capabilities of primary care practices serving a high share of disadvantaged patients compare to other practices.

OBJECTIVE

To assess capabilities around access to and quality of care among primary care practices serving a high share of Medicaid and uninsured patients compared to practices serving a low share of these patients.

DESIGN

We analyzed data from the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (response rate 46.8%), conducted 2017-2018.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2190 medical practices with at least three adult primary care physicians.

MAIN MEASURES

Our key exposures are payer mix and federally qualified health center (FQHC) designation. We classified practices as safety net if they reported a combined total of at least 25% of annual revenue from uninsured or Medicaid patients; we then further classified safety net practices into those that identified as an FQHC and those that did not.

KEY RESULTS

FQHCs were more likely than other safety net practices and non-safety net practices to offer early or late appointments (79%, 55%, 62%; p=0.001) and weekend appointments (56%, 39%, 42%; p=0.03). FQHCs more often provided medication-assisted treatment for opioid use disorders (43%, 27%, 25%; p=0.004) and behavioral health services (82%, 50%, 36%; p<0.001). FQHCs were more likely to screen patients for social and financial needs. However, FQHCs and other safety net providers had more limited electronic health record (EHR) capabilities (61%, 71%, 80%; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

FQHCs were more likely than other types of primary care practices (both safety net practices and other practices) to possess capabilities related to access and quality. However, safety net practices were less likely than non-safety net practices to possess health information technology capabilities.

Adoption of Health System Innovations: Evidence of Urban-Rural Disparities from the Ohio Primary Care Marketplace

BACKGROUND

Accountable care organizations (ACOs), patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs), and the meaningful use of electronic health records (EHRs) generated particular attention during the last decade. Translating these reforms into meaningful increases in population health depends on improving the quality and clinical integration of primary care providers (PCPs). However, if these innovations spread more quickly among PCPs in urban and wealthier areas, then they could potentially worsen existing geographic disparities in health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the market penetration of Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) ACOs, PCMHs, and the meaningful use of EHRs among PCPs across urban and rural counties in Ohio.

DESIGN

Retrospective, observational study of the percent of PCPs in a county who are affiliated with PCMH, ACO, and meaningful use (MU) of EHR.

PARTICIPANTS

PCPs in all of Ohio's 88 counties from 2011 to 2015.

MAIN MEASURES

Primary care market penetration of ACO, PCMH, and meaningful use of EHR KEY RESULTS: In 2015, the Ohio primary care market penetration of PCMH was 23.4%, ACO was 27.7%, MU stage 1 was 55.8%, and MU stage 2 was 26.6%. During the study period, PCMH and ACO market penetration increased faster in urban counties relative to rural counties, and market penetration of meaningful use of EHR increased faster in rural counties.

CONCLUSIONS

Market penetration of PCMH and ACOs increased faster in urban markets compared to rural markets. However, the adoption of EHRs increased faster in rural markets. The results are a cause for optimism as well as a call to action: although recent efforts to increase PCMH and ACO adoption were less effective among the rural population in Ohio, federal programs to accelerate adoption of EHRs were overwhelmingly successful in rural areas.

Out-Of-Network Primary Care Is Associated With Higher Per Beneficiary Spending In Medicare ACOs

Despite expectations that Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs) would curb health care spending, their effect has been modest. One possible explanation is that ACOs' inability to prohibit out-of-network care limits their control over spending. To examine this possibility, we examined the association between out-of-network care and per beneficiary spending using national Medicare data for 2012-15. While there was no association between out-of-network specialty care and ACO spending, each percentage-point increase in receipt of out-of-network primary care was associated with an increase of $10.79 in quarterly total ACO spending per beneficiary. When we broke down total spending by place of service, we found that out-of-network primary care was associated with higher spending in outpatient, skilled nursing facility, and emergency department settings, but not inpatient settings. Our findings suggest an opportunity for the Medicare program to realize substantial savings, if policy makers developed explicit incentives for beneficiaries to seek more of their primary care within network.

Disparities in Preventable Hospitalization Among Patients With Alzheimer Diseases

INTRODUCTION

System-level care coordination strategies can be the most effective to promote continuity of care among people with Alzheimer's disease; however, the evidence is lacking. The objective of this study is to determine whether accountable care organizations are associated with lower rates of potentially preventable hospitalizations for people with Alzheimer's disease and whether hospital accountable care organization affiliation is associated with reduced racial and ethnic disparities in preventable hospitalizations among patients with Alzheimer's disease.

METHODS

This study employed a cross-sectional study design and used 2015 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project inpatient claims data from 11 states and the 2015 American Hospital Association Annual Survey. Logistic regression and the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition method were used.

RESULTS

African American patients with Alzheimer's disease were less likely to be hospitalized at accountable care organization‒affiliated hospitals than White patients. Among patients with Alzheimer's disease who were hospitalized, hospital accountable care organization affiliation was associated with lower odds of potentially preventable hospitalizations (OR=0.86, p=0.02; OR=0.66, p<0.001 with propensity score matching) after controlling for patient characteristics, hospital characteristics, and state indicators. Hospital accountable care organization affiliation explained 3.01% (p<0.01) of the disparity in potentially preventable hospitalizations between White and African American patients but could not explain disparities between White and Latinx patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that accountable care organizations may be able to improve care coordination for people with Alzheimer's disease and to reduce disparities between Whites and African Americans. Further research is needed to determine whether this benefit can be attributed to accountable care organization formation or whether providers that participate in accountable care organizations tend to provide higher-quality care.

The Impact of Medicare's Alternative Payment Models on the Value of Care

Over the past decade, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have led the nationwide shift toward value-based payment. A major strategy for achieving this goal has been to implement alternative payment models (APMs) that encourage high-value care by holding providers financially accountable for both the quality and the costs of care. In particular, the CMS has implemented and scaled up two types of APMs: population-based models that emphasize accountability for overall quality and costs for defined patient populations, and episode-based payment models that emphasize accountability for quality and costs for discrete care. Both APM types have been associated with modest reductions in Medicare spending without apparent compromises in quality. However, concerns about the unintended consequences of these APMs remain, and more work is needed in several important areas. Nonetheless, both APM types represent steps to build on along the path toward a higher-value national health care system.

Between-Community Low-Income Status and Inclusion in Mandatory Bundled Payments in Medicare's Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model

This cohort study examines whether communities in Medicare’s Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) Model are representative of others nationwide with respect to residents’ socioeconomic status.

Association of Utilization Management Policy With Uptake of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy Among Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Importance

Breast cancer accounts for the largest portion of cancer-related spending in the United States. Although hypofractionated radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery is a cost-effective and convenient treatment strategy for patients with early-stage breast cancer, less than 40% of eligible women received hypofractionated radiotherapy in 2013.

Objective

To assess the association of a large commercial payer's utilization management policy with the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy among women with early-stage breast cancer and its associated cost.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective, adjusted difference-in-differences economic analysis was conducted using administrative claims data from January 1, 2012, to June 1, 2018, of women 18 years or older with early-stage breast cancer who were eligible for hypofractionated radiotherapy according to 2011 guidelines from the American Society for Radiation Oncology and were continuously enrolled in 14 geographically diverse commercial health plans covering 6.9% of US adult women. Women who received mastectomy, brachytherapy, or less than 11 or more than 40 external beam fractions of radiotherapy were excluded. A utilization management policy was used to encourage the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy among women in fully insured and Medicare Advantage (fully insured) plans. Under the new policy, claims for extended-course radiotherapy were not reimbursed for fully insured women who were eligible for hypofractionated radiotherapy. This policy did not apply to women in self-insured or Medicare supplemental insurance (self-insured) plans, allowing these groups to serve as a comparison group.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was use of hypofractionated radiotherapy, and the secondary outcome was the cost of this type of radiotherapy.

Results

Of 10 540 eligible women, 3619 (34.3%) were in fully insured plans and thus subject to the policy. There were no meaningful differences between the fully insured and self-insured groups in mean (SD) age at the start of radiotherapy (63.8 [8.6] vs 65.0 [8.9] years), mean (SD) Charlson Comorbidity Index score (3.0 [1.5] vs 3.2 [1.6]), or practice setting (outpatient hospital setting, 2982 of 3619 [82.4%] vs 5600 of 6921 [80.9%]). The policy was associated with an increase in use of hypofractionated radiotherapy among fully insured patients subject to the policy (adjusted percentage point difference-in-difference, 4.2%; 95% CI, 0.0%-8.4%; P = .05) and a nonsignificant decrease in radiotherapy-associated expenditures (-$2275 relative to self-insured patients; P = .09). Spillover analyses revealed a significantly higher uptake of hypofractionated radiotherapy among self-insured patients who were indirectly exposed to the policy (adjusted percentage point difference-in-difference, 8.5%; 95% CI, 3.6%-13.5%; P < .001) compared with those who were not exposed.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that a payer's utilization management policy was associated with direct and spillover increases in the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy, even after accounting for a long-term secular trend in the uptake of hypofractionated radiotherapy in the control groups. Utilization management may promote evidence-based cancer care.

An Insurer's Program To Incentivize Generic Oncology Drugs Did Not Alter Treatment Patterns Or Spending On Care

The high and rising costs of anticancer drugs have received national attention. The prices of brand-name anticancer drugs often dwarf those of established generic drugs with similar efficacy. In 2007-16 UnitedHealthcare sought to encourage the use of several common low-cost generic anticancer drugs by offering providers a voluntary incentivized fee schedule with substantially higher generic drug payments (and profit margins), thereby increasing financial equivalence for providers in the choice between generic and brand-name drugs and regimens. We evaluated how this voluntary payment intervention affected treatment patterns and health care spending among enrollees with breast, lung, or colorectal cancer. We found that the incentivized fee schedule had neither significant nor meaningful effects on the use of incentivized generic drugs or on spending. Practices that adopted the incentivized fee schedule already had higher rates of generic anticancer drug use before switching, which demonstrates selection bias in take-up. Our study provides cautionary evidence of the limitations of voluntary payment reform initiatives in meaningfully affecting health care practice and spending.

Is the incidence of paediatric stress fractures on the rise? Trends in New York State from 2000 to 2015

The purpose of this study is to analyze trends in the epidemiology of paediatric stress fractures. The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was queried for stress fractures in children between the ages of 6 and 18 years. After checking for monotonicity of the data, Spearman's correlation coefficient was calculated. Multivariate regressions were used to test for associations between demographic variables and risk of stress fracture. Analysis of 11 475 386 outpatient visits between 2000 and 2015 showed that the annual incidence of paediatric stress fractures increased from 1.37 cases per 100 000 outpatient visits in 2006 to 5.32 per 100 000 visits in 2015 (ρ = 0.876, P < 0.01). The mean age at the time of injury was 14.4 ± 2.8 years. Children younger than 14 years accounted for 33.6% of the cohort. Age, male sex, white ethnicity, and private insurance were statistically significant predictors of stress fractures in a multivariate model. This study is the first to document an increase in the annual incidence of paediatric stress fractures.

Practice composition and sex differences in physician income: observational study

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether differences in income between male and female physicians vary according to the sex composition of physician practices.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

US national survey of physician salaries, 2014-18.

PARTICIPANTS

18 802 physicians from 9848 group practices (categorized according to proportion of male physicians ≤50%, >50-75%, >75-90%, and >90%).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Sex differences in physician income in relation to the sex composition of physician practices after multivariable adjustment for physician specialty, years of experience, hours worked, measures of clinical workload, practice type, and geography.

RESULTS

Among 11 490 non-surgical specialists, the absolute adjusted sex difference in annual income (men versus women) was $36 604 (£29 663; €32 621) (95% confidence interval $24 903 to $48 306; 11.7% relative difference) for practices with 50% or less of male physicians compared with $91 669 ($56 587 to $126 571; 19.9% relative difference) for practices with at least 90% of male physicians (P=0.03 for difference). Similar findings were observed among surgical specialists (n=3483), with absolute adjusted sex difference in annual income of $46 503 ($42 198 to $135 205; 10.2% relative difference) for practices with 50% or less of male physicians compared with $149 460 ($86 040 to $212 880; 26.9% relative difference) for practices with at least 90% of male physicians (P=0.06 for difference). Among primary care physicians (n=3829), sex differences in income were not related to the proportion of male physicians in a practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Among both non-surgical and surgical specialists, sex differences in income were largest in practices with the highest proportion of male physicians, even after detailed adjustment for factors that might explain sex differences in income.

Proportion of Racial Minority Patients and Patients With Low Socioeconomic Status Cared for by Physician Groups After Joining Accountable Care Organizations

Importance

The incentive structure of accountable care organizations (ACOs) may lead to participating physician groups selecting fewer vulnerable patients.

Objective

To test for changes in the percentage of racial minority patients and patients with low socioeconomic status cared for by physician groups after joining the ACO.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort consisted of a 15% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to physician groups from 2010 to 2016. Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) participation was determined using ACO files. Analyses were conducted between January 1, 2019, and February 25, 2020.

Exposures

Using linear probability models, we conducted difference-in-differences analyses based on the year a physician group joined an ACO to estimate changes in vulnerable patients within ACO-participating groups compared with nonparticipating groups.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Whether the patient was black, was dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, and poverty and unemployment rates of the patient's zip code.

Results

In a cohort of 76 717 physician groups caring for 7 307 130 patients, 16.1% of groups caring for 27.8% of patients participated in an MSSP ACO. Using 2010 characteristics, patients attributed to ACOs from 2012 to 2016, compared with those who were not, were less likely to be black (8.0% [n = 81 698] vs 9.3% [n = 270 924]) or dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid (12.8% [n = 130 957] vs 18.2% [n = 528 685]), and lived in zip codes with lower poverty rates (13.8% vs 15.5%); unemployment rates were similar (8.0% vs 8.5%). In the difference-in-differences analysis, there was no statistically significant change associated with ACO participation in the proportions of vulnerable patients attributed to ACO-participating groups compared with nonparticipating groups. After joining an ACO, ACO-participating groups had 0.0 percentage points change (95% CI, -0.1 to 0.1 percentage points; P = .59) for black patients, -0.1 percentage points (95% CI, -0.2 to 0.1 percentage points; P = .32) for patients dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, 0.2 percentage points (95% CI, -3.5 to 4.0 percentage points; P = .91) in poverty rates, and -0.4 percentage points (95% CI, -2.0 to 1.2 percentage points; P = .62) in unemployment rates.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, there were no changes in the proportions of vulnerable patients cared for by ACO-participating physician groups after joining an ACO compared with changes among nonparticipating groups.

How Do Accountable Care Organizations Deliver Preventive Care Services? A Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act and the introduction of accountable care organizations (ACOs) have increased the incentives for patients and providers to engage in preventive care, for example, through quality metrics linked to disease prevention. However, little is known about how ACOs deliver preventive care services.

OBJECTIVE

To understand how Medicare ACOs provide preventive care services to their attributed patients.

DESIGN

Mixed-methods study using survey data reporting Medicare ACO capabilities in patient care management and interviews with high-performing ACOs.

PARTICIPANTS

ACO executives completed survey data on 283 Medicare ACOs. These data were supplemented with 39 interviews conducted across 18 Medicare ACOs with executive-level leaders and associated clinical and managerial staff.

MAIN MEASURES

Survey measures included ACO performance, organizational characteristics, collaboration experience, and capabilities in care management and quality improvement. Telephone interviews followed a semi-structured interview guide and explored the mechanisms used, and motivations of, ACOs to deliver preventive care services.

KEY RESULTS

Medicare ACOs that reported being comprehensively engaged in the planning and management of patient care - including conducting reminders for preventive care services - had more beneficiaries and had a history of collaboration experience, but were not more likely to receive shared savings or achieve high-quality scores compared to other surveyed ACOs. Interviews revealed that offering annual wellness visits and having a system-wide approach to closing preventive care gaps are key mechanisms used by high-performing ACOs to address patients' preventive care needs. Few programs or initiatives were identified that specifically target clinically complex patients. Aside from meeting patient needs, motivations for ACOs included increasing patient attribution and meeting performance targets.

CONCLUSIONS

ACOs are increasingly motivated to deliver preventive care services. Understanding the mechanisms and motivations used by high-performing ACOs may help both providers and payers to increase the use of preventive care.

Do Medicare Accountable Care Organizations Reduce Disparities After Spinal Fracture?

BACKGROUND

National changes in health care disparities within the setting of trauma care have not been examined within Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) or non-ACOs. We sought to examine the impact of ACOs on post-treatment outcomes (in-hospital mortality, 90-day complications, and readmissions), as well as surgical intervention among whites and nonwhites treated for spinal fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified all beneficiaries treated for spinal fractures between 2009 and 2014 using national Medicare fee for service claims data. Claims were used to identify sociodemographic and clinical criteria, receipt of surgery and in-hospital mortality, 90-day complications, and readmissions. Multivariable logistic regression analysis accounting for all confounders was used to determine the effect of race/ethnicity on outcomes. Nonwhites were compared with whites treated in non-ACOs between 2009 and 2011 as the referent.

RESULTS

We identified 245,704 patients who were treated for spinal fractures. Two percent of the cohort received care in an ACO, whereas 7% were nonwhite. We found that disparities in the use of surgical fixation for spinal fractures were present in non-ACOs over the period 2009-2014 but did not exist in the context of care provided through ACOs (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44, 1.28). A disparity in the development of complications existed for nonwhites in non-ACOs (OR 1.09; 95% CI 1.01, 1.17) that was not encountered among nonwhites receiving care in ACOs (OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.90, 1.95). An existing disparity in readmission rates for nonwhites in ACOs over 2009-2011 (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.01, 1.80) was eliminated in the period 2012-2014 (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.65, 1.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Our work reinforces the idea that ACOs could improve health care disparities among nonwhites. There is also the potential that as ACOs become more familiar with care integration and streamlined delivery of services, further improvements in disparities could be realized.

Characteristics of Physicians Participating in Medicare's Oncology Care Model Bundled Payment Program

PURPOSE

The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is Medicare's first bundled payment program for patients with cancer. We examined baseline characteristics of OCM physician participants and markets with high OCM physician participation to inform generalizability and complement the ongoing practice-level evaluation of the OCM.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we identified characteristics of US medical oncologists practicing in 2016, using a national telephone-verified physician database. We linked these data with Dartmouth Atlas and Medicare claims data from 2011 through 2016 to identify characteristics of markets with high OCM participation. We used logistic regression to examine relationships between market characteristics and OCM participation.

RESULTS

Of 10,428 US medical oncologists, 2,605 (24.9%) were listed in an OCM practice. There were no differences in sex or medical training between OCM participants and nonparticipants, although OCM participants were slightly younger. OCM participants practiced in larger (median daily patient volume, 80 v 55 patients) and urban practices (95.2% v 90.7%) and were less likely to be part of a health system (41.0% v 60.4%) or solo practice (45.5% v 67.4%; all P < .001). Participation was higher in southern and mid-Atlantic markets. Markets with high OCM physician participation had higher specialist density, hospital care intensity, and acute care use at the end of life (all P < .001). Market-level penetration of Accountable Care Organizations (adjusted odds ratio, 4.65; 95% CI 3.31 to 6.56; P < .001) and Medicare Advantage (adjusted odds ratio 2.82; 95% CI, 1.97 to 4.06; P < .001) were associated with higher OCM participation.

CONCLUSION

In the first description of oncologists participating in the OCM, we found differences in practice demographics, care intensity, and exposure to nontraditional payment models between OCM-participating and nonparticipating physicians. Such provider-level differences may not be captured in Medicare's practice-level analysis.

Health Policy Engagement Strategy for the Health Information Technology Policy Project of the Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research

Rulemaking is one of the most important ways the federal government makes public policy. It frequently has significant impact on individuals, communities, and organizations. Yet, few of those directly affected are familiar with the rulemaking process, and even fewer understand how it works. This article describes a case study of the Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research Health Information Technology (TCC HIT) Policy Project's approach to health-policy engagement using: 1) social media; and 2) a webinar to educate stakeholders on the rulemaking process and increase their level of meaningful engagement with the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) proposed rule public comment submission. The webinar "Paying for Quality: What Is the Impact on Health Equity" was promoted through Twitter and held in June 2016. In total, we posted 19 tweets using two distinct hashtags (#MACRA4Equity, #MACRA2Equity) to raise awareness of the upcoming MACRA proposed rule and its possible effects on health equity. Overall, 252 individuals registered for the webinar, and more than half participated (n=133). Most (67%) registrants reported that health policy was not the primary focus of their current position. Based on information provided in the webinar, 95% agreed that their understanding of the topic improved. By the end of the webinar, 44% of participants indicated that they planned to submit public comments for MACRA, a 12% increase compared with those who planned to submit at the time of registration. The TCC health-policy engagement strategy demonstrates the feasibility of engaging a diverse audience around health policy issues, particularly those who are not typically engaged in policy work.

Performance in the Medicare Shared Savings Program by Accountable Care Organizations Disproportionately Serving Dual and Disabled Populations

BACKGROUND

The growth of accountable care organizations (ACOs) and other alternative payment models has prompted concern about whether these models will disadvantage providers who serve vulnerable populations, particularly those living in poverty or with a disability.

OBJECTIVE

To examine performance by ACOs in the top quintile of their proportion of beneficiaries dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid (high-dual) and the top quintile of disabled beneficiaries (high-disabled).

RESEARCH DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

SUBJECTS

The 333 ACOs in the Medicare Shared Savings Program in 2014, followed through 2016.

MEASURES

Quality scores, savings per beneficiary, whether or not the ACO shared savings, and amount of shared savings.

RESULTS

High-dual and high-disabled ACOs had slightly lower quality and similar or higher baseline spending than other ACOs, but achieved greater savings per beneficiary than other ACOs ($212 vs. $51 for high-dual ACOs, P=0.04; $241 vs. $44 for high-disabled ACOs, P=0.012). Further, these ACOs were equally or more likely to earn shared savings; just over 30% of high-dual ACOs earned shared savings compared with 25% of non-high-dual ACOs (P=0.35) and 38% of high-disabled ACOs earned shared savings compared with 23% of non-high-disabled ACOs (P=0.013). In longitudinal analyses, we found a decrease in the differences in quality between high-social risk and other ACOs over time. Savings remained higher for high-dual and high-disabled ACOs relative to other ACOs over 2014-2016 though the gap narrowed over time.

CONCLUSIONS

High-dual and high-disabled ACOs had similar or higher spending than other ACOs at baseline, but achieved greater savings and were equally or more likely to earn shared savings, suggesting that alternative payment models can have positive financial outcomes for providers who serve vulnerable populations.

Social Risk Adjustment of Quality Measures for Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease in a Commercially Insured US Population

IMPORTANCE

Patients' social risk factors may be associated with physician group performance on quality measures.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of social risk with change in physician group performance on diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD) quality measures in a commercially insured population.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this cross-sectional study using claims data from 2010 to 2014 from a US national health insurance plan, the performance of 1400 physician groups (physicians billing under the same tax identification number) was estimated. After base adjustments for age and sex, changes in variation across groups and reordering of rankings resulting from additional adjustments for clinical, social, or both clinical and social risk factors were analyzed. In all models, only within-group associations were adjusted to distinguish the association of patients' social risk factors with outcomes while excluding physician groups' distinct characteristics that could also change observed performance. Data analysis was conducted between April and July 2018.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Process measures (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] testing, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] testing, and statin use), disease control measures (HbA1c and LDL-C level control), and use-based outcome measures (hospitalizations for ambulatory-sensitive conditions) were calculated with base adjustment (age and sex), clinical adjustment, social risk factor adjustment, and both clinical and social adjustments. Quality variance in physician group performance and changes in rankings following these adjustments were measured.

RESULTS

This study identified 1 684 167 enrollees (859 618 [51%] men) aged 18 to 65 years (mean [SD] age, 50 [10.7] years) with diabetes or CVD. Performance rates were high for HbA1c and LDL-C level testing (mean ranged from 79.5% to 87.2%) but lower for statin use (54.7% for diabetes cohort and 44.2% for CVD cohort) and disease control measures (57.9% on LDL-C control for diabetes cohort and 40.0% for CVD cohort). On average, only 8.8% of enrollees with diabetes and 1.0% of enrollees with CVD in a group were hospitalized. The addition of clinical and social risk factors to base adjustment reduced variance across physician groups for most measures (percentage change in SD ranged from -13.9% to 1.6%). Although overall agreement between performance scores with base vs full adjustment was high, there was still substantial reordering for some measures. For example, social risk adjustment resulted in reordering for disease control in the diabetes cohort. Of the 1400 physician groups, 330 (23.6%) had performance rankings for HbA1c control that increased or decreased by at least 10 percentile points after adding social risk factors to age and sex. Both clinical and social risk adjustment affected rankings on hospital admissions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Accounting for social risk may be important to mitigate adverse consequences of performance-based payments for physician groups serving socially vulnerable populations.

Association of Physician Group Participation in Accountable Care Organizations With Patient Social and Clinical Characteristics

IMPORTANCE

Accountable care organizations (ACOs) may increase health care disparities by excluding physician groups that care for socially and clinically vulnerable patients.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the association between the patient characteristics of a physician group and the group's participation in a newly formed ACO.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study investigated a 20% random sample of US Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to physician groups identified in Medicare claims before ACO participation from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2011. Physician groups that participated and did not participate in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2014, were identified in the Medicare MSSP 2014 provider file. Data analyses were conducted from September 1, 2017, to March 30, 2018.

EXPOSURES

Using multivariable regression, the association between physician group participation in the MSSP and the group's patients' characteristics before ACO formation was estimated focusing on measures of the vulnerability of the group's patients. All ACO-participating physician groups were compared with ACO-nonparticipating physician groups for reference, and estimates were made at the physician and patient level.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Percentage of a physician group's patient panel that was socially vulnerable (based on race, dual Medicare and Medicaid enrollment, or living in high-poverty zip code) or clinically high risk.

RESULTS

Among 67 891 physician groups caring for 5 394 181 patients, 7215 physician groups (10.6%) participated in an MSSP ACO by 2014. Comparing mean percentages across practices, the patients of non-ACO-participating physician groups, more patients of ACO-participating physician groups were black (mean percentage across practices, 12.1% vs 10.6%), dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid (23.0% vs 19.3%), living in poverty (10.7% vs 11.1%), and high risk (34.2% vs 30.2%). After adjustment, physician groups that participated in an ACO had 5.1 percentage points (95% CI, 0.1-10.0 percentage points; P = .05) more dually enrolled patients and 4.0 percentage points (95% CI, 1.9-6.1 percentage points; P < .001) more high-risk patients. At the patient level, patients who were at high risk were more likely to be attributed to a group that became part of an ACO, with 4.5 percentage points (95% CI, 0.5-8.5 percentage points; P = .03) more high-risk patients being attributed to an ACO, but other associations were not statistically different from zero.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Accountable care organizations may be an effective approach to target care among high-risk patients. In this study, physician groups that participated in the MSSP ACO program cared for more clinically vulnerable patients than did nonparticipating groups, and ACO-participating physician groups cared for an equally large number of socially vulnerable patients compared with nonparticipating physician groups.

Primary care clinicians' perspectives about quality measurements in safety-net clinics and non-safety-net clinics

BACKGROUND

Quality metrics, pay for performance (P4P), and value-based payments are prominent aspects of the current and future American healthcare system. However, linking clinic payment to clinic quality measures may financially disadvantage safety-net clinics and their patient population because safety-net clinics often have worse quality metric scores than non-safety net clinics. The Minnesota Safety Net Coalition's Quality Measurement Enhancement Project sought to collect data from primary care providers' (PCPs) experiences, which could assist Minnesota policymakers and state agencies as they create a new P4P system. Our research study aims are to identify PCPs' perspectives about 1) quality metrics at safety net clinics and non-safety net clinics, 2) how clinic quality measures affect patients and patient care, and 3) how payment for quality measures may influence healthcare.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews with 14 PCPs (4 individual interviews and 3 focus groups) who had worked at both safety net and non-safety net primary care clinics in Minneapolis-St Paul Minnesota USA metropolitan area. Qualitative analyses identified major themes.

RESULTS

Three themes with sub-themes emerged. Theme #1: Minnesota's current clinic quality scores are influenced more by patients and clinic systems than by clinicians. Theme #2: Collecting data for a set of specific quality measures is not the same as measuring quality healthcare. Subtheme #2.1: Current quality measures are not aligned with how patients and clinicians define quality healthcare. Theme #3: Current quality measures are a product of and embedded in social and structural inequities in the American health care system. Subtheme #3.1: The current inequitable healthcare system should not be reinforced with financial payments. Subtheme #3.2: Health equity requires new metrics and a new healthcare system. Overall, PCPs felt that the current inequitable quality metrics should be replaced by different metrics along with major changes to the healthcare system that could produce greater health equity.

CONCLUSION

Aligning payment with the current quality metrics could perpetuate and exacerbate social inequities and health disparities. Policymakers should consider PCPs' perspectives and create a quality-payment framework that does not disadvantage patients who are affected by social and structural inequities as well as the clinics and providers who serve them.

Use of Chronic Care Management Codes for Medicare Beneficiaries: a Missed Opportunity?

BACKGROUND

Physicians spend significant time outside of regular office visits caring for complex patients, and this work is often uncompensated. In 2015, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced a billing code for care coordination between office visits for beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions.

OBJECTIVE

Characterize use of the Chronic Care Management (CCM) code in New England in 2015.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

All Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in New England continuously enrolled in Parts A and B in 2015.

INTERVENTION

None.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was the number of beneficiaries with a CCM claim per 1000 eligible beneficiaries. Secondary outcomes included the total number of CCM claims, total reimbursement, mean number of claims per beneficiary, and beneficiary characteristics independently associated with receiving CCM services.

KEY RESULTS

Of the more than two million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in New England, almost 1.7 million were potentially eligible for CCM services. Among eligible beneficiaries, 10,951 (0.65%) had a CCM claim in 2015. Massachusetts had the highest penetration of CCM use (9.40 claims per 1000 eligible beneficiaries); Vermont had the lowest (0.54 claims per 1000 eligible beneficiaries). Mean reimbursement per physician was $1745.98. Age, race/ethnicity, dual-eligible status, income, number of chronic conditions, and state of residence were associated with receiving CCM services in an adjusted model.

CONCLUSIONS

The CCM code is likely underutilized in New England; the program may therefore not be achieving its intended goal of encouraging consistent, team-based chronic care management for Medicare's most complex beneficiaries. Or practices may be foregoing reimbursement for care coordination that they are already providing. Recently implemented revisions may improve uptake of CCM services; it will be important to compare our results with future utilization.

Comparison of Populations Served in Hospital Service Areas With and Without Comprehensive Primary Care Plus Medical Homes

IMPORTANCE

Little is known about the types of primary care practices that have chosen to participate in the Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+) program or about how participation could affect disparities.

OBJECTIVE

To describe practices that joined the CPC+ model and compare hospital service areas with and without CPC+ practices.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This comparative cross-sectional study identified 2647 CPC+ practices in round 1 (from January 1, 2017; round 1 is ongoing through 2021). Using IMS Health Care Organization Services data, ownership and characteristics of health systems and practices were extracted. Practices participating in the CPC+ program were compared with practices with similar proportions of primary care physicians (>85%) within the 14 regions designated as eligible to participate by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Within eligible regions, hospital service areas with (n = 434) and without (n = 322) 1 or more CPC+ practice were compared. Characteristics compared included area-level population demographics (from the US Census Bureau), health system characteristics (from the IMS Health Care Organization Services), and use of health services by Medicare fee-for-service enrollees (Dartmouth Atlas).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Area-level characteristics of all eligible CPC+ regions, areas without a CPC+ practice, and areas with 1 or more CPC+ practices.

RESULTS

Of 756 eligible service areas, 322 had no CPC+ practices and 434 had at least 1 CPC+ practice. Of 2647 CPC+ practices, 579 (21.9%) had 1 physician and 1791 (67.7%) had 2 to 10 physicians. In areas without CPC+ practices, the population had a lower median income ($43 197 [interquartile range, $42 170-$44 224] vs $57 206 [interquartile range, $55 470-$58 941]), higher mean share of households living in poverty (17.8% [95% CI, 17.2%-18.4%] vs 14.4% [95% CI, 13.9%-15.0%]), higher mean educational attainment of high school or less (52.7% [95% CI, 51.7%-53.6%] vs 43.1% [95% CI, 42.1%-44.2%]), higher mean proportion of disabled residents (17.7% [95% CI, 17.3%-18.2%] vs 14.2% [13.8%-14.6%]), higher mean participation in Medicare (21.9% [95% CI, 21.3%-22.4%] vs 18.8% [95% CI, 18.3%-19.1%]) and Medicaid (22.2% [95% CI, 21.5%-22.9%]) vs 18.5% [95% CI, 17.8%-19.2%]), and higher mean proportion of uninsured residents (12.4% [95% CI, 11.9%-12.9%] vs 10.3% [95% CI, 9.9%-10.7%]) (P < .001 for all) compared with areas that had a CPC+ practice.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

According to this study, although a diverse set of practices joined the CPC+ program, practices in areas characterized by patient populations with greater advantage were more likely to join, which may affect access to advanced primary care medical home models such as CPC+, by vulnerable populations.

Could Pay-for-Performance Worsen Health Disparities?

Pay-for-performance (P4P) has become a prominent component of health care funding in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) era. Although the ACA's future remains unclear, these programs receive bipartisan support and will likely continue to be a part of payment policies. At the same time, racial and class disparities remain among the most pressing of the many challenges facing the US health system. We review evidence of the effects of P4P on disparities at the population and individual levels. Providers caring for predominantly minority patients or those with lower socioeconomic status are known to have poorer quality metrics. Financial penalties run the risk of exacerbating disparities along race and class lines and across hospitals. The evidence regarding P4P programs is mixed, with safety-net hospitals facing greater penalties but with some improvement in outcomes among minority patients. A better understanding of the longitudinal effects of these plans is needed, and policymakers should be conscious of the risks in expanding these programs.

Financial Incentives and Physician Practice Participation in Medicare's Value-Based Reforms

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether greater experience and success with performance incentives among physician practices are related to increased participation in Medicare's voluntary value-based payment reforms.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Publicly available data from Medicare's Physician Compare (n = 1,278; January 2012 to November 2013) and nationally representative physician practice data from the National Survey of Physician Organizations 3 (NSPO3; n = 907,538; 2013).

STUDY DESIGN

We used regression analysis to examine practice-level relationships between prior exposure to performance incentives and participation in key Medicare value-based payment reforms: accountable care organization (ACO) programs, the Physician Quality Reporting System ("Physician Compare"), and the Meaningful Use of Health Information Technology program ("Meaningful Use"). Prior experience and success with financial incentives were measured as (1) the percentage of practices' revenue from financial incentives for quality or efficiency; and (2) practices' exposure to public reporting of quality measures.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We linked physician participation data from Medicare's Physician Compare to the NSPO3 survey.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

There was wide variation in practices' exposure to performance incentives, with 64 percent exposed to financial incentives, 45 percent exposed to public reporting, and 2.2 percent of practice revenue coming from financial incentives. For each percentage-point increase in financial incentives, there was a 0.9 percentage-point increase in the probability of participating in ACOs (standard error [SE], 0.1, p < .001) and a 0.8 percentage-point increase in the probability of participating in Meaningful Use (SE, 0.1, p < .001), controlling for practice characteristics. Financial incentives were not associated with participation in Physician Compare. Among ACO participants, a 1 percentage-point increase in incentives was associated with a 0.7 percentage-point increase in the probability of being "very well" prepared to utilize cost and quality data (SE, 0.1, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians organizations' prior experience and success with performance incentives were related to participation in Medicare ACO arrangements and participation in the meaningful use criteria but not to participation in Physician Compare. We conclude that Medicare must complement financial incentives with additional efforts to address the needs of practices with less experience with such incentives to promote value-based payment on a broader scale.