Dataset Information

The new frontier of strategic alliances in health care: New partnerships under accountable care organizations.

ABSTRACT: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) and similar reforms aim to improve coordination between health care providers; however, due to the fragmented nature of the US health care system, successful coordination will hinge in large part on the ability of health care organizations to successfully partner across organizational boundaries. Little is known about new partnerships formed under the ACO model. We use mixed methods data from the National Survey of ACOs, Medicare ACO performance data and interviews with executive leaders across 31 ACOs to examine the prevalence, characteristics, and capabilities of partnership ACOs and why and how ACO partnerships form. We find that a striking percentage of ACOs - 81% - involve new partnerships between independent health care organizations. These "partnership ACOs" generally report lower capabilities on care management, care coordination, and health information technology. Additionally, under Medicare ACO programs partnership ACO achieved somewhat lower quality performance. Qualitative interviews revealed that providers are motivated to partner for resource complementarity, risk reduction, and legislative requirements, and are using a variety of formal and informal accountability mechanisms. Most partnership ACOs were formed out of existing, positive relationships, but a minority of ACOs formed out of previously competitive or conflictual relationships. Our findings suggests that the success of the ACO model will hinge in large part upon the success of new partnerships, with important implications for understanding ACO readiness and capabilities, the relatively small savings achieved to date by ACO programs, and the path to providers bearing more risk for population health management. In addition, ACO partnerships may provide an important window to monitor a potential wave of health care consolidation or, in contrast, a new model of independent providers successfully coordinating patient care.

SUBMITTER: Lewis VA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5607095 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The new frontier of strategic alliances in health care: New partnerships under accountable care organizations.

Lewis Valerie A VA Tierney Katherine I KI Colla Carrie H CH Shortell Stephen M SM

Social science & medicine (1982) 20170502

Accountable care organizations (ACOs) and similar reforms aim to improve coordination between health care providers; however, due to the fragmented nature of the US health care system, successful coordination will hinge in large part on the ability of health care organizations to successfully partner across organizational boundaries. Little is known about new partnerships formed under the ACO model. We use mixed methods data from the National Survey of ACOs, Medicare ACO performance data and int ...[more]

PMID: 28806586

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAccountable care organizations (ACOs) aim to control health expenditures while improving quality of care. Primary care has been emphasized as a means to reduce spending, but little is known about the implications of using specialists for achieving this ACO objective.ObjectiveTo examine the association between ACO-beneficiary office visits conducted by specialists and the cost and utilization outcomes of those visits.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study obtained data on 620 distinct ACOs from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations Public-Use Files from April 1, 2012, to September 30, 2017. Generalized estimating equation models were used for analysis of ACOs, adjusting for ACO-beneficiary health status, Medicare enrollment groups, ACO size, and proportion of participating specialists.ExposuresSpecialist encounter proportion, the percentage of office visits provided by a specialist, was categorized into 7 discrete groups: less than 35%, 35% to less than 40%, 40% to less than 45% (reference group), 45% to less than 50%, 50% to less than 55%, 55% to less than 60%, and 60% or greater.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was total expenditures (given in US dollars) per assigned beneficiary person-year. The secondary outcomes were total numbers of emergency department visits, hospital discharges, skilled nursing facility discharges, and magnetic resonance imaging orders.ResultsIn total, the data set included 1836 ACO-year (number of participation years per ACO) observations for 620 distinct ACOs. Those ACOs with a specialist encounter proportion of 40% to less than 45% had $1129 (95% CI, $445-$1814) lower per-beneficiary person-year spending than did ACOs in the lowest specialist encounter proportion group and had $752 (95% CI, $115-$1389) lower per-beneficiary person-year spending compared with ACOs in the highest specialist encounter proportion group. Monotonic decreases in emergency department visits, hospital discharges, and skilled nursing facility discharges were observed with increasing specialist encounter proportion. Conversely, monotonic increases in magnetic resonance imaging volume discharges were observed with increasing specialist encounter proportion.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that an ACO's ability to reduce spending may require sufficient involvement in care processes from specialists, who seem to complement the intrinsic primary care approach in ACOs.

Project description:In the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP), accountable care organizations (ACOs) have financial incentives to lower spending and improve quality. We used quasi-experimental methods to assess the early performance of MSSP ACOs.Using Medicare claims from 2009 through 2013 and a difference-in-differences design, we compared changes in spending and in performance on quality measures from before the start of ACO contracts to after the start of the contracts between beneficiaries served by the 220 ACOs entering the MSSP in mid-2012 (2012 ACO cohort) or January 2013 (2013 ACO cohort) and those served by non-ACO providers (control group), with adjustment for geographic area and beneficiary characteristics. We analyzed the 2012 and 2013 ACO cohorts separately because entry time could reflect the capacity of an ACO to achieve savings. We compared ACO savings according to organizational structure, baseline spending, and concurrent ACO contracting with commercial insurers.Adjusted Medicare spending and spending trends were similar in the ACO cohorts and the control group during the precontract period. In 2013, the differential change (i.e., the between-group difference in the change from the precontract period) in total adjusted annual spending was -$144 per beneficiary in the 2012 ACO cohort as compared with the control group (P=0.02), consistent with a 1.4% savings, but only -$3 per beneficiary in the 2013 ACO cohort as compared with the control group (P=0.96). Estimated savings were consistently greater in independent primary care groups than in hospital-integrated groups among 2012 and 2013 MSSP entrants (P=0.005 for interaction). MSSP contracts were associated with improved performance on some quality measures and unchanged performance on others.The first full year of MSSP contracts was associated with early reductions in Medicare spending among 2012 entrants but not among 2013 entrants. Savings were greater in independent primary care groups than in hospital-integrated groups.

Project description:BackgroundAccountable care organizations (ACOs) are proliferating as a solution to the cost crisis in American health care, and already involve as many as 31 million patients. ACOs hold clinicians, group practices, and in many circumstances hospitals financially accountable for reducing expenditures and improving their patients' health outcomes. The structure of health care affects the ethical issues arising in the practice of medicine; therefore, like all health care organizational structures, ACOs will experience ethical challenges. No framework exists to assist key ACO stakeholders in identifying or managing these challenges.MethodsWe conducted a structured review of the medical ACO literature using qualitative content analysis to inform identification of ethical challenges for ACOs.ResultsOur analysis found infrequent discussion of ethics as an explicit concern for ACOs. Nonetheless, we identified nine critical ethical challenges, often described in other terms, for ACO stakeholders. Leaders could face challenges regarding fair resource allocation (e.g., about fairly using ACOs' shared savings), protection of professionals' ethical obligations (especially related to the design of financial incentives), and development of fair decision processes (e.g., ensuring that beneficiary representatives on the ACO board truly represent the ACO's patients). Clinicians could perceive threats to their professional autonomy (e.g., through cost control measures), a sense of dual or conflicted responsibility to their patients and the ACO, or competition with other clinicians. For patients, critical ethical challenges will include protecting their autonomy, ensuring privacy and confidentiality, and effectively engaging them with the ACO.DiscussionACOs are not inherently more or less "ethical" than other health care payment models, such as fee-for-service or pure capitation. ACOs' nascent development and flexibility in design, however, present a time-sensitive opportunity to ensure their ethical operation, promote their success, and refine their design and implementation by identifying, managing, and conducting research into the ethical issues they might face.

Project description:BackgroundIncentives for accountable care organizations (ACOs) to limit health care use and improve quality may enhance or hurt patients' experiences with care.MethodsUsing Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey data covering 3 years before and 1 year after the start of Medicare ACO contracts in 2012 as well as linked Medicare claims, we compared patients' experiences in a group of 32,334 fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to ACOs (ACO group) with those in a group of 251,593 beneficiaries attributed to other providers (control group), before and after the start of ACO contracts. We used linear regression and a difference-in-differences analysis to estimate changes in patients' experiences in the ACO group that differed from concurrent changes in the control group, with adjustment for the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the patients.ResultsAfter ACO contracts began, patients' reports of timely access to care and their primary physicians' being informed about specialty care differentially improved in the ACO group, as compared with the control group (P=0.01 and P=0.006, respectively), whereas patients' ratings of physicians, interactions with physicians, and overall care did not differentially change. Among patients with multiple chronic conditions and high predicted Medicare spending, overall ratings of care differentially improved in the ACO group as compared with the control group (P=0.02). Differential improvements in timely access to care and overall ratings were equivalent to moving from average performance among ACOs to the 86th to 98th percentile (timely access to care) and to the 82nd to 96th percentile (overall ratings) and were robust to adjustment for group differences in trends during the preintervention period.ConclusionsIn the first year, ACO contracts were associated with meaningful improvements in some measures of patients' experience and with unchanged performance in others. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others.).

Dataset Information

The new frontier of strategic alliances in health care: New partnerships under accountable care organizations.

Publications

The new frontier of strategic alliances in health care: New partnerships under accountable care organizations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets