The impact of capitated payment on preventive care utilization in community health clinics

Only half of the United States population regularly receives recommended preventive care services. Alternative payment models (e.g., a per-member-per-month capitated payment model) may encourage the delivery of preventive services when compared to a fee-for-service visitbased model; however, evaluation is lacking in the United States. This study assesses the impact of implementing Oregon's Alternative Payment Methodology (APM) on orders for preventive services within community health centers (CHCs). This retrospective cohort study uses electronic health record data from the OCHIN, Inc., 2012-2018, analyzed in 2018-2019. Twenty-seven CHCs which implemented APM in 2013-2016 were compared to six non-APM CHCs. Clinic-level quarterly rates of ordering nine preventive services in 2012-2018 were calculated. For each phase and preventive service, we used difference-in-differences analysis to assess the APM impact on ordering preventive care. We found greater increases for APM CHCs compared to non-APM CHCs for orders of mammograms (difference-in-differences estimates (DDs) across four phases:1.69-2.45). Both groups had decreases in ordering cervical cancer screenings, however, APM CHCs had smaller decreases (DDs:1.62-1.93). The APM CHCs had significantly greater decreases in influenza vaccinations (DDs:0.17-0.32). There were no consistent significant differences in pre-post changes in APM vs. non-APM CHCs for cardiometabolic risk screenings, smoking status and depression assessments. There was nonsignificant change in the proportion of nontraditional encounters in APM clinics compared to controls. Transition from fee-for-service to an APM did not negatively impact delivery of preventive care. Further studies are needed to understand how to change encounter structures to best deliver recommended preventive care.

Receipt of Preventive Care Services Among US Adults with Inflammatory Bowel Disease, 2015-2016

BACKGROUND

Previous reports suggest that adults with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receive suboptimal preventive care.

AIMS

The population-based study compared the receipt of these services by US adults with and without IBD.

METHODS

Adults aged ≥ 18 years with IBD (1.2%) and without IBD were identified from the 2015 and 2016 National Health Interview Survey (n = 66,610). Age-standardized prevalence of doctor visits, receipt of medical advice, and selected preventive care was calculated for adults with and without IBD. The model-adjusted prevalence ratios were estimated for receipt of preventive care associated with IBD.

RESULTS

The prevalence of a doctor visit in the past 12 months was significantly higher among adults with IBD than those without. IBD was also associated with significantly higher prevalence of receiving medical advice about smoking cessation (83.9% vs. 66.4%) and diet (42.9% vs. 32.1%), having colon cancer screening in the past 12 months (44.0% vs. 26.7%), having ever had an HIV test (51.5% vs. 45.4%) or pneumococcal vaccine (75.3% vs. 64.0%), having received a tetanus vaccine in the past 10 years (72.0% vs. 61.8%), and having received a flu vaccine in the past 12 months (48.4% vs. 41.0%), but was not significantly associated with receiving cervical cancer screening and hepatitis A and B vaccines.

CONCLUSIONS

Adults with IBD were more likely to receive many types of preventive care than adults without IBD. The findings can inform healthcare policy makers to make strategic decisions that enhance multidisciplinary coordination from various medical specialties to ensure optimal preventive care for IBD patients.

Impact of removing cost sharing under the affordable care act (ACA) on mammography and pap test use

BACKGROUND

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) required private insurers and Medicare to cover recommended preventive services without any cost sharing to improve utilization of these services. This study is an attempt to identify the impact of removing cost sharing on mammography and pap test utilization rates.

METHODS

Counterfactual analysis was used to predict what would have been the screening rates in post-ACA if ACA was not there. This was done by estimating a model that examines determinants of dependent variable for the pre-ACA year (pre-ACA year is 2009). The estimated model was then used to predict the dependent variable for the post-ACA year using individual characteristics and other relevant variables unlikely to be affected by ACA (post-ACA year is 2016). Effect of ACA is defined as the difference between the values of dependent variables in post-ACA and the predicted values of dependent variables in the post-ACA year using counterfactual.

RESULTS

The counterfactual analysis show that the utilization of mammogram and pap test did not improve following ACA.

CONCLUSION

Removal of cost-sharing under the ACA did not improve mammography or pap test rates. Therefore, financial barrier may not be an important factor in affecting utilization of the screening tests and policy makers should focus on other non-financial barriers in order to improve coverage of the tests.