Variation In Accountable Care Organization Spending And Sensitivity To Risk Adjustment: Implications For Benchmarking.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rose S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5436972 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Variation In Accountable Care Organization Spending And Sensitivity To Risk Adjustment: Implications For Benchmarking.
Rose Sherri S Zaslavsky Alan M AM McWilliams J Michael JM
Health affairs (Project Hope) 20160301 3
Spending targets (or benchmarks) for accountable care organizations (ACOs) participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program must be set carefully to encourage program participation while achieving fiscal goals and minimizing unintended consequences, such as penalizing ACOs for serving sicker patients. Recently proposed regulatory changes include measures to make benchmarks more similar for ACOs in the same area with different historical spending levels. We found that ACOs vary widely in how ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceAccountable care contracts hold physician groups financially responsible for the quality and cost of health care delivered to patients. Focusing on clinically vulnerable patients, those with serious conditions who are responsible for the greatest proportion of spending, may result in the largest effects on both patient outcomes and financial rewards for participating physician groups.ObjectiveTo estimate the effect of Medicare accountable care organization (ACO) contracts on spending and high-cost institutional use for all Medicare beneficiaries and for clinically vulnerable beneficiaries.Design, setting, and participantsFor this cohort study, 2 study populations were defined: the overall Medicare population and the clinically vulnerable subgroup of Medicare beneficiaries. The overall Medicare population was based on a random 40% sample drawn from continuously enrolled fee-for-service beneficiaries with at least 1 evaluation and management visit in a calendar year. The clinically vulnerable study population included all Medicare beneficiaries 66 years or older who had at least 3 Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCCs). Beneficiaries entered the cohort during the quarter between January 2009 to December 2011 when they first had at least 3 HCCs and remained in the cohort until death. Cohort entry was restricted to the preperiod to account for potential changes in coding practices after ACO implementation. Difference-in-difference estimations were used to compare changes in health care outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries attributed to physicians in ACOs with those attributed to non-ACO physicians from January 2009 to December 2013.ExposuresMedicare ACOs beginning contracts in January 2012, April 2012, July 2012, and January 2013 through the Pioneer and Medicare Shared Savings Programs.Main outcomes and measuresTotal spending per beneficiary-quarter, spending categories, use of hospitals and emergency departments, ambulatory care sensitive admissions, and 30-day readmissions.ResultsTotal spending decreased by $34 (95% CI, -$52 to -$15) per beneficiary-quarter after ACO contract implementation across the overall Medicare population (n = 15 592 600) and decreased $114 in clinically vulnerable patients (n = 8 673 823) (95% CI, -$178 to -$50). In the overall Medicare cohort, hospitalizations and emergency department visits decreased by 1.3 and 3.0 events per 1000 beneficiaries per quarter, respectively (95% CIs: -2.1 to -0.4 and -4.8 to -1.3), and hospitalizations and emergency department visits decreased in the clinically vulnerable cohort by 2.9 and 4.1 events per 1000 beneficiaries per quarter, respectively (95% CIs: -5.2 to -0.7 and -7.1 to -1.2). Changes in total spending associated with ACOs did not vary by clinical condition of beneficiaries.Conclusions and relevanceMedicare ACO programs are associated with modest reductions in spending and use of hospitals and emergency departments. Savings were realized through reductions in use of institutional settings in clinically vulnerable patients.
| S-EPMC4969198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSpending on cancer patients is substantial and has increased in recent years. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are arguably the most important national experiment to control health-care spending. How ACOs are managing patients with cancer at the end of life (EOL) is largely unknown. We conducted this study with the objective of determining whether becoming an ACO is associated with subsequent changes in EOL spending or utilization among patients with cancer.MethodsUsing national Medicare claims from 2011 to 2015, we identified patients who died in 2012 (pre-ACO, n = 12 248) and 2015 (post-ACO, n = 12 248), assigning each decedent to a practice. ACOs were matched to non-ACOs within the same geographic region. We used a difference-in-difference model to examine changes in EOL spending and utilization associated with becoming an ACO in the Medicare Shared Savings Program for beneficiaries with cancer.ResultsWe found that the introduction of ACOs had no meaningful impact on overall EOL spending in cancer patients (change in overall spending in ACOs = -$1687 vs -$1434 in non-ACOs, difference = $253, 95% confidence interval = -$1809 to $1304, P= .75). We found no changes in total patient spending by cancer type examined or by spending categories, including cancer-specific categories of radiation, therapy, and hospice services. Finally, emergency department visits, inpatient hospitalization, intensive care unit admissions, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and hospice use did not meaningfully differ between ACO and non-ACO patients.ConclusionsThe introduction of ACOs does not appear to have had any meaningful effect on EOL spending or utilization for patients with a cancer diagnosis.
| S-EPMC6910163 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSurgical care among older adults is costly. While Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs) are designed around primary care, there are reasons to believe that participation may also affect spending on surgery. This study examines the impact that Medicare ACO alignment has on spending for inpatient and outpatient surgical care.Study designWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using national Medicare claims (2008 through 2015). Among a 20% random sample of beneficiaries, we identified adults 65 years of age and older enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, distinguishing between those aligned and unaligned with a Medicare ACO. We then measured payments for surgical services made on their behalf. Finally, we fit multivariable regression models to evaluate the association between ACO alignment and spending for inpatient and outpatient surgical care.ResultsWe identified 37,249,845 beneficiary-year observations, of which 2,950,188 (7.9%) were aligned with a Medicare ACO. After adjustment for patient factors, ACO alignment was associated with $181 [95% confidence interval (CI), -$243 to -$118; P <0.001] lower spending per beneficiary-year. ACO alignment was associated with 2.9% fewer inpatient surgical episodes per year [incidence rate ratio (IRR), 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96 to 0.98; P <0.001] but 2.3% more outpatient episodes per year (IRR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.03; P <0.001). Among inpatient surgical episodes, average payments were $956 lower for ACO aligned beneficiaries (95%CI -$1218 to -$694, P <0.001).Conclusions and relevanceACO alignment was associated with savings on surgical care. These savings resulted from increased outpatient surgery and reduced use of inpatient surgery as well as reduced spending per inpatient surgical episode. Greater focus on surgical care may improve the ability of ACOs to control healthcare spending.
| S-EPMC7561039 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have been shown to reduce prostate cancer treatment among men unlikely to benefit because of competing risks (ie, potential overtreatment). This study assessed whether the level of engagement in ACOs by urologists affected rates of treatment, overtreatment, and spending. METHODS:A 20% sample of national Medicare data was used to identify men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2012 and 2014. The extent of urologist engagement in an ACO, as measured by the proportion of patients in an ACO managed by an ACO-participating urologist, served as the exposure. The use of treatment, potential overtreatment (ie, treatment in men with a ?75% risk of 10-year noncancer mortality), and average payments in the year after diagnosis for each ACO were modeled. RESULTS:Among 2822 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, the median rates of treatment and potential overtreatment by an ACO were 71.3% (range, 23.6%-79.5%) and 53.6% (range, 12.4%-76.9%), respectively. Average Medicare payments among ACOs in the year after diagnosis ranged from $16,523.52 to $34,766.33. Stronger urologist-ACO engagement was not associated with treatment (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-1.2; P?=?.4) or spending (9.7% decrease in spending; P?=?.08). However, urologist engagement was associated with a lower likelihood of potential overtreatment (odds ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.86; P?=?.03). CONCLUSIONS:ACOs vary widely in treatment, potential overtreatment, and spending for prostate cancer. ACOs with stronger urologist engagement are less likely to treat men with a high risk of noncancer mortality, and this suggests that organizations that better engage specialists may be able to improve the value of specialty care. Cancer 2018. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
| S-EPMC6108926 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesDespite representing 1% of the population, beneficiaries on long-term dialysis account for over 7% of Medicare's fee-for-service spending. Because of their focus on care coordination, Accountable Care Organizations may be an effective model to reduce spending inefficiencies for this population. We analyzed Medicare data to examine time trends in long-term dialysis beneficiary alignment to Accountable Care Organizations and differences in spending for those who were Accountable Care Organization aligned versus nonaligned.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsIn this retrospective cohort study, beneficiaries on long-term dialysis between 2009 and 2016 were identified using a 20% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries. Trends in alignment to an Accountable Care Organization were compared with alignment of the general Medicare population from 2012 to 2016. Using an interrupted time series approach, we examined the association between Accountable Care Organization alignment and the primary outcome of total spending for long-term dialysis beneficiaries from prior to Accountable Care Organization implementation (2009-2011) through implementation of the Comprehensive ESRD Care model in October 2015. We fit linear regression models with generalized estimating equations to adjust for patient characteristics.ResultsDuring the study period, 135,152 beneficiaries on long-term dialysis were identified. The percentage of long-term dialysis beneficiaries aligned to an Accountable Care Organization increased from 6% to 23% from 2012 to 2016. In the time series analysis, spending on Accountable Care Organization-aligned beneficiaries was $143 (95% confidence interval, $5 to $282) less per beneficiary-quarter than spending for nonaligned beneficiaries. In analyses stratified by whether beneficiaries received care from a primary care physician, savings by Accountable Care Organization-aligned beneficiaries were limited to those with care by a primary care physician ($235; 95% confidence interval, $73 to $397).ConclusionsThere was a substantial increase in the percentage of long-term dialysis beneficiaries aligned to an Accountable Care Organization from 2012 to 2016. Moreover, in adjusted models, Accountable Care Organization alignment was associated with modest cost savings among long-term dialysis beneficiaries with care by a primary care physician.
| S-EPMC7769034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe benefits of public payment policy may extend to private populations through "spillover" effects. If cost-saving efforts in Medicare also reduce costs among commercially insured patients, Medicare payment systems could be a versatile policy tool in future reform efforts.ObjectivesTo determine whether physicians who participated in a Medicare Accountable Care Organization (ACO) reduced spending among their commercial patients.DesignThis was a retrospective, longitudinal study which was conducted using Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) claims data from 2010 to 2015. We compared patients seen by physicians who participated in a Medicare ACO to patients whose physicians were not part of an ACO. We used a difference-in-differences (DIDs) design to test whether physician participation in an ACO was associated with reduced spending among their commercially insured patients. We also tested for heterogeneous effects: we assessed whether spillovers were larger among patients with clinical conditions (acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, congestive heart failure) that have previously been targeted by Medicare payment programs.SettingThis was a population-based study of commercially insured patients in Michigan.ParticipantsPatients who experienced a significant clinical episode (eg, labor and delivery, acute myocardial infarction) between 2010 and 2015.ExposureOur patient-level exposure is treatment by a Medicare ACO-affiliated physician.Main outcomes and measuresMedical spending of 0-90 days and 91-365 days after a clinical episode.ResultsPatients in the exposure group (n=54,750) and in the control group (n=137,883) were similar in demographic characteristics of age, sex, and type of clinical episodes. Adjusted mean 90-day spending in the preexposure period was $21,292 among the exposure group and $21,157 among the comparison group; these means declined to $21,250 and $20,995 in the postperiod, yielding a DIDs estimate of $119 [95% confidence interval (CI), -$170 to $408]. Adjusted means for 91-365 days spending in the preperiod were $4258 among the exposure group and $4251 among the comparison group; these means rose to $4338 and $4421 in the postperiod, yielding a DIDs estimate of -$90 (95% CI, -$312 to $132). We also separately examined patients with conditions that have been targeted by other Medicare payment programs. Among these patients, 90-day spending did not differ between exposure and comparison groups (DIDs, -$223; 95% CI, -$2037 to $1591), although 91-365 days spending decreased among the exposure group with marginal statistical significance (DIDs, -$1160; 95% CI, -$2459 to $140).Conclusions and relevancePhysicians who participated in Medicare ACOs did not reduce spending among most of their commercially insured patients. Medicare policy is unlikely to confer significant spillover benefits to the commercially insured population.
| S-EPMC6417956 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Accountable care organizations (ACOs) aim to improve health care quality and reduce costs, including among patients with heart failure (HF). However, variation across ACOs in admission rates for patients with HF and associated factors are not well described. Methods and Results We identified Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with HF who were assigned to a Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO in 2017 and survived ≥30 days into 2018. We calculated risk-standardized acute admission rates across ACOs, assigned ACOs to 1 of 3 performance categories, and examined associations between ACO characteristics and performance categories. Among 1 232 222 beneficiaries with HF, 283 795 (mean age, 81 years; 54% women; 86% White; 78% urban) were assigned to 1 of 467 Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs. Across ACOs, the median risk-standardized acute admission rate was 87 admissions per 100 people, ranging from 61 (minimum) to 109 (maximum) admissions per 100 beneficiaries. Compared to the overall average, 13% of ACOs performed better on risk-standardized acute admission rates, 72% were no different, and 14% performed worse. Most ACOs with better performance had fewer Black beneficiaries and were not hospital affiliated. Most ACOs that performed worse than average were large, located in the Northeast, had a hospital affiliation, and had a lower proportion of primary care providers. Conclusions Admissions are common among beneficiaries with HF in ACOs, and there is variation in risk-standardized acute admission rates across ACOs. ACO performance was associated with certain ACO characteristics. Future studies should attempt to elucidate the relationship between ACO structure and characteristics and admission risk.
| S-EPMC10356066 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) using cost reduction measures in specialist compensation demonstrated better performance.Data sourcesNational, cross-sectional survey data on ACOs (2013-2015) linked to public-use data on ACO performance (2014-2016).Study designWe compared characteristics of ACOs that did and did not report use of cost reduction measures in specialist compensation and determined the association between using this approach and ACO savings, outpatient spending, and specialist visit rates.Principal findingsOf 160 ACOs surveyed, 26 percent reported using cost reduction measures to help determine specialist compensation. ACOs using cost reduction in specialist compensation were more often physician-led (68.3 vs 49.6 percent) and served higher-risk patients (mean Hierarchical Condition Category score 1.09 vs 1.05). These ACOs had similar savings per beneficiary year (adjusted difference $82.6 [95% CI -77.9, 243.1]), outpatient spending per beneficiary year (-24.0 [95% CI -248.9, 200.8]), and specialist visits per 1000 beneficiary years (369.7 [95% CI -9.3, 748.7]).ConclusionIncentivizing specialists on cost reduction was not associated with ACO savings in the short term. Further work is needed to determine the most effective approach to engage specialists in ACO efforts.
| S-EPMC7518824 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealth-related social needs (HRSN) are associated with higher chronic disease prevalence and healthcare utilization. Health systems increasingly screen for HRSN during routine care. In this study, we compare the differential prevalence of social risk factors and social needs in a Medicaid Accountable Care Organization (ACO) and identify the patient and practice characteristics associated with reporting social needs in a different domain from social risks.MethodsCross-sectional study of patient responses to HRSN screening February 2019-February 2020. HRSN screening occurred as part of routine primary care and assessed social risk factors in eight domains and social needs by requesting resources in these domains. Participants included adult and pediatric patients from 114 primary care practices. We measured patient-reported social risk factors and social needs from the HRSN screening, and performed multivariable regression to evaluate patient and practice characteristics associated with reporting social needs and concordance to social risks. Covariates included patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, language, and practice proportion of patients with Medicaid and/or Limited English Proficiency (LEP).ResultsTwenty-seven thousand four hundred thirteen individuals completed 30,703 screenings, including 15,205 (55.5%) caregivers of pediatric patients. Among completed screenings, 13,692 (44.6%) were positive for ≥ 1 social risk factor and 2,944 (9.6%) for ≥ 3 risks; 5,861 (19.1%) were positive for social needs and 4,848 (35.4%) for both. Notably, 1,013 (6.0%) were negative for social risks but positive for social needs. Patients who did not identify as non-Hispanic White or were in higher proportion LEP or Medicaid practices were more likely to report social needs, with or without social risks. Patients who were non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, preferred non-English languages or were in higher LEP or Medicaid practices were more likely to report social needs without accompanying social risks.ConclusionsHalf of Medicaid ACO patients screened for HRSN reported social risk factors or social needs, with incomplete overlap between groups. Screening for both social risks and social needs can identify more individuals with HRSN and increase opportunities to mitigate negative health outcomes.
| S-EPMC9675191 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Despite rapid diffusion of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), whether ACO enrollment results in observable changes in cancer screening remains unknown. Objective:To determine whether Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) ACO enrollment changes the appropriateness of screening for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants:For this population-based analysis of Medicare beneficiaries, we used Medicare data from 2007 through 2014 and evaluated changes in screening associated with ACO enrollment using differences-in-differences (DD) analyses. We then performed difference-in-difference-in-differences (DDD) analyses to determine whether observed changes in cancer screening associated with ACO enrollment were different across strata of appropriateness, defined using age (65-74 years vs ≥75 years) and predicted survival (top vs bottom quartile). Main Outcomes and Measures:Rates of breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening measured yearly as a proportion of eligible Medicare beneficiaries undergoing relevant screening services. Results:Among Medicare beneficiaries, comprising 39 218 652 person-years before MSSP enrollment and 17 252 345 person-years after MSSP enrollment, breast cancer screening declined among both ACO (42.7% precontract, 38.1% postcontract) and non-ACO (37.3% precontract, 34.1% postcontract) populations. The adjusted rate of decline (DD) in the ACO population exceeded the non-ACO population by 0.79% (P < .001). This decline was most pronounced among elderly women (-2.1%), with minimal observed change among younger women (-0.26%). Baseline colorectal cancer screening rates were lower than those for breast cancer among both ACO (10.1% precontract, 10.3% postcontract) and non-ACO (9.2% precontract, 9.1% postcontract) populations. We observed an adjusted 0.24% (P = .03) increase in screening associated with ACO enrollment, most pronounced among younger Medicare beneficiaries (0.36%). For breast and colorectal cancer, we observed statistically significant differences in estimates of effect between age strata, suggesting that the ACO effect on cancer screening is mediated by age (DDD for both P < .001). Prostate cancer screening declined among ACO (35.1% precontract, 28.5% postcontract) and non-ACO (31.2% precontract, 25.7% postcontract) populations. The adjusted rate of decline in the ACO population exceeded that of the non-ACO population by 1.2%. We observed no difference in estimate of effect between age strata, suggesting that the ACO-mediated changes in prostate cancer screening are similar among younger and elderly men. Results characterizing appropriateness with predicted survival mirrored those when stratified by age. Conclusions and Relevance:Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO enrollment is associated with more appropriate breast and colorectal screening, although the magnitude of the observed ACO effect is modest in the early ACO experience.
| S-EPMC5876897 | biostudies-literature