Literature DB >> 32438480

Early impact of the implementation of Medicaid episode-based payment reforms in Arkansas.

Matt Toth1, Paul Moore1, Elizabeth Tant1, Regina Rutledge1, Heather Beil1, Sam Arbes1, Nathan West1, Suzanne L West1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate episode-based payments for upper respiratory tract infections (URI) and perinatal care in Arkansas's Medicaid population. STUDY
SETTING: Upper respiratory infection and perinatal episodes among Medicaid-covered individuals in Arkansas and comparison states from fiscal year (FY) 2011 to 2014. STUDY
DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational analysis using a difference-in-difference design to examine outcomes associated with URI and perinatal episodes of care (EOC) from 2011 to 2014. Key dependent variables include antibiotic use, emergency department visits, physician visits, hospitalizations, readmission, and preventive screenings. DATA COLLECTION: Claims data from the Medicaid Analytic Extract for Arkansas, Mississippi, and Missouri from 2010 to 2014 with supplemental county-level data from the Area Health Resource File (AHRF). PRINCIPAL
FINDINGS: The URI EOC reduced the probability of antibiotic use (marginal effect [ME] = -1.8, 90% CI: -2.2, -1.4), physician visits (ME = 0.6, 90% CI: -0.8, -0.4), improved the probability of strep tests for children diagnosed with pharyngitis (ME = 9.4, 90% CI: 8.5, 10.3), but also increased the probability of an emergency department (ED) visit (ME = 0.1, 90% CI: 0.1, 0.2), relative to the comparison group. For perinatal EOCs, we found a reduced probability of an ED visit during pregnancy (ME = 0.1, 90% CI: -0.2, -0.0), an increased probability of screening for HIV (ME = 6.2, 90% CI: 4.0, 8.5), chlamydia (ME = 9.5, 90% CI: 7.2, 11.8), and group B strep-test (ME = 2.6, 90% CI: 0.5, 4.6), relative to the comparison group. Predelivery and postpartum hospitalizations also increased (ME = 1.2, 90% CI: 0.4, 2.0; ME = 0.4, 90% CI: 0.0, 0.8, respectively), relative to the comparison group.
CONCLUSION: Upper respiratory infection and perinatal EOCs for Arkansas Medicaid beneficiaries produced mixed results. Aligning shared savings with quality metrics and cost-thresholds may help achieve quality targets and disincentivize over utilization within the EOC, but may also have unintended consequences. © Health Research and Educational Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Medicaid; bundled payment; perinatal care; upper respiratory infection; utilization

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32438480      PMCID: PMC7376005          DOI: 10.1111/1475-6773.13296

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Serv Res        ISSN: 0017-9124            Impact factor:   3.402


  14 in total

1.  State innovation model initiative: a state-led approach to accelerating health care system transformation.

Authors:  Lauren S Hughes; Alon Peltz; Patrick H Conway
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  CMS--engaging multiple payers in payment reform.

Authors:  Rahul Rajkumar; Patrick H Conway; Marilyn Tavenner
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Episode-Based Payment for Perinatal Care in Medicaid: Implications for Practice and Policy.

Authors:  Marian Jarlenski; Sonya Borrero; Trey La Charité; Nikki B Zite
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Understanding why patients of low socioeconomic status prefer hospitals over ambulatory care.

Authors:  Shreya Kangovi; Frances K Barg; Tamala Carter; Judith A Long; Richard Shannon; David Grande
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 6.301

5.  Emergency Department Use in the Perinatal Period: An Opportunity for Early Intervention.

Authors:  Saloni Malik; Catherine Kothari; Colleen MacCallum; Michael Liepman; Shama Tareen; Karin V Rhodes
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2017-08-12       Impact factor: 5.721

6.  Early impact of the implementation of Medicaid episode-based payment reforms in Arkansas.

Authors:  Matt Toth; Paul Moore; Elizabeth Tant; Regina Rutledge; Heather Beil; Sam Arbes; Nathan West; Suzanne L West
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Cost of Joint Replacement Using Bundled Payment Models.

Authors:  Amol S Navathe; Andrea B Troxel; Joshua M Liao; Nan Nan; Jingsan Zhu; Wenjun Zhong; Ezekiel J Emanuel
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 21.873

8.  Two-Year Evaluation of Mandatory Bundled Payments for Joint Replacement.

Authors:  Michael L Barnett; Andrew Wilcock; J Michael McWilliams; Arnold M Epstein; Karen E Joynt Maddox; E John Orav; David C Grabowski; Ateev Mehrotra
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Association Between Hospital Participation in a Medicare Bundled Payment Initiative and Payments and Quality Outcomes for Lower Extremity Joint Replacement Episodes.

Authors:  Laura A Dummit; Daver Kahvecioglu; Grecia Marrufo; Rahul Rajkumar; Jaclyn Marshall; Eleonora Tan; Matthew J Press; Shannon Flood; L Daniel Muldoon; Qian Gu; Andrea Hassol; David M Bott; Amy Bassano; Patrick H Conway
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-09-27       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 10.  The Effects of Pay-for-Performance Programs on Health, Health Care Use, and Processes of Care: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Aaron Mendelson; Karli Kondo; Cheryl Damberg; Allison Low; Makalapua Motúapuaka; Michele Freeman; Maya O'Neil; Rose Relevo; Devan Kansagara
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  1 in total

1.  Early impact of the implementation of Medicaid episode-based payment reforms in Arkansas.

Authors:  Matt Toth; Paul Moore; Elizabeth Tant; Regina Rutledge; Heather Beil; Sam Arbes; Nathan West; Suzanne L West
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 3.402

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.