Literature DB >> 27074035

Two-Year Costs and Quality in the Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative.

Stacy B Dale1, Arkadipta Ghosh1, Deborah N Peikes1, Timothy J Day1, Frank B Yoon1, Erin Fries Taylor1, Kaylyn Swankoski1, Ann S O'Malley1, Patrick H Conway1, Rahul Rajkumar1, Matthew J Press1, Laura Sessums1, Randall Brown1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The 4-year, multipayer Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative was started in October 2012 to determine whether several forms of support would produce changes in care delivery that would improve the quality and reduce the costs of care at 497 primary care practices in seven regions across the United States. Support included the provision of care-management fees, the opportunity to earn shared savings, and the provision of data feedback and learning support.
METHODS: We tracked changes in the delivery of care by practices participating in the initiative and used difference-in-differences regressions to compare changes over the first 2 years of the initiative in Medicare expenditures, health care utilization, claims-based measures of quality, and patient experience for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to initiative practices and a group of matched comparison practices.
RESULTS: During the first 2 years, initiative practices received a median of $115,000 per clinician in care-management fees. The practices reported improvements in approaches to the delivery of primary care in areas such as management of the care of high-risk patients and enhanced access to care. Changes in average monthly Medicare expenditures per beneficiary did not differ significantly between initiative and comparison practices when care-management fees were not taken into account (-$11; 95% confidence interval [CI], -$23 to $1; P=0.07; negative values indicate less growth in spending at initiative practices) or when these fees were taken into account ($7; 95% CI, -$5 to $19; P=0.27). The only significant differences in other measures were a 3% reduction in primary care visits for initiative practices relative to comparison practices (P<0.001) and changes in two of the six domains of patient experience--discussion of decisions regarding medication with patients and the provision of support for patients taking care of their own health--both of which showed a small improvement in initiative practices relative to comparison practices (P=0.006 and P<0.001, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Midway through this 4-year intervention, practices participating in the initiative have reported progress in transforming the delivery of primary care. However, at this point these practices have not yet shown savings in expenditures for Medicare Parts A and B after accounting for care-management fees, nor have they shown an appreciable improvement in the quality of care or patient experience. (Funded by the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02320591.).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27074035     DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsa1414953

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  40 in total

1.  Synthesis Of Research On Patient-Centered Medical Homes Brings Systematic Differences Into Relief.

Authors:  Anna D Sinaiko; Mary Beth Landrum; David J Meyers; Shehnaz Alidina; Daniel D Maeng; Mark W Friedberg; Lisa M Kern; Alison M Edwards; Signe Peterson Flieger; Patricia R Houck; Pamela Peele; Robert J Reid; Katharine McGraves-Lloyd; Karl Finison; Meredith B Rosenthal
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  Oregon's Medicaid Reform And Transition To Global Budgets Were Associated With Reductions In Expenditures.

Authors:  K John McConnell; Stephanie Renfro; Richard C Lindrooth; Deborah J Cohen; Neal T Wallace; Michael E Chernew
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 6.301

3.  Early Performance in Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations: A Comparison of Oregon and Colorado.

Authors:  K John McConnell; Stephanie Renfro; Benjamin K S Chan; Thomas H A Meath; Aaron Mendelson; Deborah Cohen; Jeanette Waxmonsky; Dennis McCarty; Neal Wallace; Richard C Lindrooth
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 21.873

4.  Association Of A Regional Health Improvement Collaborative With Ambulatory Care-Sensitive Hospitalizations.

Authors:  Joseph Tanenbaum; Randall D Cebul; Mark Votruba; Douglas Einstadter
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 6.301

5.  Patient Dismissal by Primary Care Practices.

Authors:  Ann S O'Malley; Kaylyn Swankoski; Deborah Peikes; Jesse Crosson; Nancy Duda; Timothy Day; Shannon Heitkamp
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 21.873

6.  Development and Validation of the Modified Patient-Centered Medical Home Assessment for the Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative.

Authors:  Dmitriy Poznyak; Deborah N Peikes; Breanna A Wakar; Randall S Brown; Robert J Reid
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Matching and Regression to the Mean in Difference-in-Differences Analysis.

Authors:  Jamie R Daw; Laura A Hatfield
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 8.  Payment Reform, Medication Use, and Costs: Can We Afford to Leave Out Drugs?

Authors:  Natasha Parekh; Mark McClellan; William H Shrank
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Association Between Extending CareFirst's Medical Home Program to Medicare Patients and Quality of Care, Utilization, and Spending.

Authors:  G Greg Peterson; Kristin Lowe Geonnotti; Lauren Hula; Timothy Day; Laura Blue; Keith Kranker; Boyd Gilman; Kate Stewart; Sheila Hoag; Lorenzo Moreno
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 21.873

10.  Technical Assistance for Primary Care Practice Transformation: Free Help to Perform Unpaid Labor?

Authors:  Lawrence P Casalino
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 5.166

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.