Dataset Information

Racial-Ethnic Composition of Primary Care Practices and Comprehensive Primary Care Plus Initiative Participation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

It remains unclear whether the racial-ethnic composition or the socioeconomic profiles of eligible primary care practices better explain practice participation in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+) program.

Objective

To examine whether practices serving high proportions of Black or Latino Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries were less likely to participate in CPC+ in 2021 compared to practices serving lower proportions of these populations.

Design

2019 IQVIA OneKey data on practice characteristics was linked with 2018 CMS claims data and 2021 CMS CPC+ participation data. Medicare FFS beneficiaries were attributed to practices using CMS's primary care attribution method.

Participants

11,718 primary care practices and 7,264,812 attributed Medicare FFS beneficiaries across 18 eligible regions.

Methods

Multivariable logistic regression models examined whether eligible practices with relatively high shares of Black or Latino Medicare FFS beneficiaries were less likely to participate in CPC+ in 2021, controlling for the clinical and socioeconomic profiles of practices.

Main measures

Proportion of Medicare FFS beneficiaries attributed to each practice that are (1) Latino and (2) Black.

Key results

Of the eligible practices, 26.9% were CPC+ participants. In adjusted analyses, practices with relatively high shares of Black (adjusted odds ratio, aOR = 0.62, p < 0.05) and Latino (aOR = 0.32, p < 0.01) beneficiaries were less likely to participate in CPC+ compared to practices with lower shares of these beneficiary groups. State differences in CPC+ participation rates partially explained participation disparities for practices with relatively high shares of Black beneficiaries, but did not explain participation disparities for practices with relatively high shares of Latino beneficiaries.

Conclusions

The racial-ethnic composition of eligible primary care practices is more strongly associated with CPC+ participation than census tract-level poverty. Practice eligibility requirements for CMS-sponsored initiatives should be reconsidered so that Black and Latino beneficiaries are not left out of the benefits of practice transformation.

SUBMITTER: Rubio K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10593678 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Racial-Ethnic Composition of Primary Care Practices and Comprehensive Primary Care Plus Initiative Participation.

Rubio Karl K Fraze Taressa K TK Bibi Salma S Rodriguez Hector P HP

Journal of general internal medicine 20230320 13

<h4>Background</h4>It remains unclear whether the racial-ethnic composition or the socioeconomic profiles of eligible primary care practices better explain practice participation in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+) program.<h4>Objective</h4>To examine whether practices serving high proportions of Black or Latino Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries were less likely to participate in CPC+ in 2021 compared to practices serving low ...[more]

PMID: 36941423

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn 2020, primary care practices adopted telemedicine as an alternative to in-person visits. Little is known about whether access to telemedicine was equitable, especially among older patients. Our objectives were to (1) examine older adults' use of telemedicine versus in-person primary care visits and (2) compare hospitalization for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs) between the groups.MethodsIn this retrospective cross-sectional study of 17,103 patients aged ≥65 years seen at 32 clinics in the Mid-Atlantic, primary care patients were classified into two groups-telemedicine versus in person-based on the first visit between March and May 2020 and followed up for 14 days. Using multivariable logistic regression, we measured the odds of being seen via telemedicine versus in person as a function of patient demographics, comorbidities, and week of study period. We then measured the odds of ACSC hospitalization by visit modality.ResultsMean age was 75.1 years (SD, 7.5), 60.6% of patients were female, 64.6% white, 28.1% black, and 2.0% Hispanic. Overall, 60.3% of patients accessed primary care via telemedicine. Black (vs. white) patients had higher odds of using telemedicine (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.30; 95% CI, 1.14-1.47) and Hispanic (vs. not Hispanic) patients had lower odds (aOR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42-0.92). Compared with the in-person group, patients in the telemedicine group had lower odds of ACSC hospitalization (aOR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-1.00). Among patients who used telemedicine, black patients had 1.43 higher odds of ACSC hospitalization (95% CI, 1.02-2.01) compared with white patients. Patients aged 85 or older seen via telemedicine had higher odds of an ACSC hospitalization (aOR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.03-2.47) compared with patients aged 65-74.ConclusionsThese findings support the use of telemedicine for primary care access for older adults. However, the observed disparities highlight the need to improve care quality and equity regardless of visit modality.

Project description:BackgroundThe province of Ontario, Canada has made major investments in interdisciplinary primary care teams. There is interest in both demonstrating and improving the quality of care they provide. Challenges include lack of consensus on the definition of quality and evidence that the process of measuring quality can be counter-productive to actually achieving it. This study describes how primary care teams in Ontario voluntarily measured quality at the team level.MethodsData for this 4-year observational study came from electronic medical records (EMRs), patient surveys and administrative reports. Descriptive statistics were calculated for individual measures (eg, access, preventive interventions) and composite indicators of quality and healthcare system costs. Repeated measures identified patient and practice characteristics related to quality and cost outcomes.ResultsTeams participated in an average of 5 of 8 possible iterations of the reporting process. There was variation between teams. For example, cervical cancer screening rates ranged from 21 to 86% of eligible patients. Rural teams had significantly better performance on some indicators (eg, continuity) and worse on others (eg, cancer screening). There were some statistical but small changes in performance over time.ConclusionHigh, sustained voluntary participation suggests that the initiative served a need for the primary care teams involved. The absence of robust data standards suggests that these standards were not crucial to achieve participation. The constant level of performance might mean that measurement has not yet led to improvement or that measures used might not accurately reflect improvement. The data reinforce the need to consider differences between rural and urban settings. They also suggest that further analysis is needed to identify characteristics that teams can change to improve the quality of care their patients experience. The study describes a practical, sustainable real-world approach to performance measurement in primary care that was attractive to interdisciplinary teams.

Project description:Multi-compartment body-composition models that divide the body into its multiple constituents are the criterion method for measuring body fat percentage, fat mass, and fat-free mass. However, 2- and 3-compartment body-composition devices such as air displacement plethysmography (ADP), DXA, and bioelectrical impedance devices [bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)] are more commonly used. Accurate measures depend on several assumptions, including constant hydration, body proportion, fat-free body density, and population characteristics. Investigations evaluating body composition in racial and ethnic minorities have observed differences in the aforementioned components between cohorts. Consequently, for racial/ethnic minority populations, estimates of body composition may not be valid. The purpose of this review was to comprehensively examine the validity of common body-composition devices in multi-ethnic samples (samples including >1 race/ethnicity) and in African-American, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American populations. Based on the literature, DXA produces valid results in multi-ethnic samples and ADP is valid for Hispanic and African American males when utilizing race-specific equations. However, for DXA and ADP, there is a need for validity investigations that include larger, more racially diverse samples, specifically including Hispanic/Latinx, Asian, Native American adults, and African-American females. Technology has advanced significantly since initial validity studies were conducted; therefore, conclusions are based on outdated models and software. For BIA, body-composition measures may be valid in a multi-ethnic sample, but the literature demonstrates disparate results between races/ethnicities. For BIA and ADP, the majority of studies have utilized DXA or hydrostatic weighing as the criterion to determine validity; additional studies utilizing a multi-compartment model criterion are essential to evaluate accuracy. Validity studies evaluating more recent technology in larger, more racially/ethnically diverse samples may improve our ability to select the appropriate method to accurately assess body composition in each racial/ethnic population.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the association between a large-scale, multi-payer primary care redesign-the Comprehensive Primary Care (CPC) Initiative-on outpatient emergency department (ED) and urgent care center (UCC) use and to identify the types of visits that drive the overall trends observed.Data sourcesMedicare claims data capturing characteristics and outcomes of 565 674 Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries attributed to 497 CPC practices and 1 165 284 beneficiaries attributed to 908 comparison practices.Study designWe used an adjusted difference-in-differences framework to test the association between CPC and beneficiaries' ED and UCC use from October 2012 through December 2016. Regression models controlled for baseline practice and patient characteristics and practice-level clustering of standard errors. Our key outcomes were all-cause and primary care substitutable (PC substitutable) outpatient ED and UCC visits, and potentially primary care preventable (PPC preventable) ED visits, categorized by the New York University Emergency Department Algorithm. We used a propensity score-matched comparison group of practices that were similar to CPC practices before CPC on multiple dimensions. Both groups of practices had similar growth in ED and UCC visits in the two-year period before CPC.Principal findingsComprehensive Primary Care practices had 2% (P = .06) lower growth in all-cause ED visits than comparison practices. They had 3% (P = .02) lower growth in PC substitutable ED visits, driven by lower growth in weekday PC substitutable visits (4%, P = .002). There was 3% (P = .04) lower growth in PPC preventable ED visits with no weekday/nonweekday differential. As expected, our falsification test showed no difference in ED visits for injuries. UCC visits had 9% lower growth for both all-cause (P = .08) and PC substitutable visits (P = .07).ConclusionsOur results suggest that greater access to the practice and more effective primary care both contributed to the lower growth in ED and UCC visits during the initiative.

Dataset Information

Racial-Ethnic Composition of Primary Care Practices and Comprehensive Primary Care Plus Initiative Participation.

Background

Objective

Design

Participants

Methods

Main measures

Key results

Conclusions

Publications

Racial-Ethnic Composition of Primary Care Practices and Comprehensive Primary Care Plus Initiative Participation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets