Rachel A Burton1, Stephen Zuckerman2, Susan G Haber3, Vincent Keyes4. 1. The Urban Institute, Washington, DC rachelaburtonmpp@gmail.com. 2. The Urban Institute, Washington, DC. 3. RTI International, Waltham, Massachusetts. 4. RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To identify components of the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model of care that are associated with lower spending and utilization among Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: Regression analyses of changes in outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries in practices that engaged in particular PCMH activities compared with beneficiaries in practices that did not. We analyzed claims for 302,719 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries linked to PCMH surveys completed by 394 practices in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' 8-state Multi-Payer Advanced Primary Care Practice demonstration. RESULTS: Six activities were associated with lower spending or utilization. Use of a registry to identify and remind patients due for preventive services was associated with all 4 of our outcome measures: total spending was $69.77 less per beneficiary per month (PBPM) (P = 0.00); acute-care hospital spending was $36.62 less PBPM (P = 0.00); there were 6.78 fewer hospital admissions per 1,000 beneficiaries per quarter (P1KBPQ) (P = 0.003); and 11.05 fewer emergency department (ED) visits P1KBPQ (P = 0.05). Using a patient registry for pre-visit planning and clinician reminders was associated with $29.31 lower total spending PBPM (P = 0.05). Engaging patients with chronic conditions in goal setting and action planning was associated with 4.62 fewer hospital admissions P1KBPQ (P = 0.01) and 11.53 fewer ED visits P1KBPQ (P = 0.00). Monitoring patients during hospital stays was associated with $22.06 lower hospital spending PBPM (P = 0.03). Developing referral protocols with commonly referred-to clinicians was associated with 11.62 fewer ED visits P1KBPQ (P = 0.00). Using quality improvement approaches was associated with 13.47 fewer ED visits P1KBPQ (P =0.00). CONCLUSIONS: Practices seeking to deliver more efficient care may benefit from implementing these 6 activities.
PURPOSE: To identify components of the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model of care that are associated with lower spending and utilization among Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: Regression analyses of changes in outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries in practices that engaged in particular PCMH activities compared with beneficiaries in practices that did not. We analyzed claims for 302,719 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries linked to PCMH surveys completed by 394 practices in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' 8-state Multi-Payer Advanced Primary Care Practice demonstration. RESULTS: Six activities were associated with lower spending or utilization. Use of a registry to identify and remind patients due for preventive services was associated with all 4 of our outcome measures: total spending was $69.77 less per beneficiary per month (PBPM) (P = 0.00); acute-care hospital spending was $36.62 less PBPM (P = 0.00); there were 6.78 fewer hospital admissions per 1,000 beneficiaries per quarter (P1KBPQ) (P = 0.003); and 11.05 fewer emergency department (ED) visits P1KBPQ (P = 0.05). Using a patient registry for pre-visit planning and clinician reminders was associated with $29.31 lower total spending PBPM (P = 0.05). Engaging patients with chronic conditions in goal setting and action planning was associated with 4.62 fewer hospital admissions P1KBPQ (P = 0.01) and 11.53 fewer ED visits P1KBPQ (P = 0.00). Monitoring patients during hospital stays was associated with $22.06 lower hospital spending PBPM (P = 0.03). Developing referral protocols with commonly referred-to clinicians was associated with 11.62 fewer ED visits P1KBPQ (P = 0.00). Using quality improvement approaches was associated with 13.47 fewer ED visits P1KBPQ (P =0.00). CONCLUSIONS: Practices seeking to deliver more efficient care may benefit from implementing these 6 activities.
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
Authors: Leif I Solberg; Stephen E Asche; Patricia Fontaine; Thomas J Flottemesch; L Gregory Pawlson; Sarah Hudson Scholle Journal: J Ambul Care Manage Date: 2011 Jan-Mar
Authors: Robert S Nocon; Ravi Sharma; Jonathan M Birnberg; Quyen Ngo-Metzger; Sang Mee Lee; Marshall H Chin Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-07-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Thomas J Flottemesch; Sarah Hudson Scholle; Patrick J O'Connor; Leif I Solberg; Steve Asche; L Gregory Pawlson Journal: Med Care Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Jean Yoon; Danielle E Rose; Ismelda Canelo; Anjali S Upadhyay; Gordon Schectman; Richard Stark; Lisa V Rubenstein; Elizabeth M Yano Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-03-26 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Nicholas Meo; Edwin Wong; Haili Sun; Idamay Curtis; Adam Batten; Stephan D Fihn; Karin Nelson Journal: Popul Health Manag Date: 2017-07-05 Impact factor: 2.459
Authors: Lori A Bilello; Allyson Hall; Jeffrey Harman; Christopher Scuderi; Nipa Shah; Jon C Mills; Shenae Samuels Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 2.497