Gynecologic oncology care in the world of accountable care organizations.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Dorney KM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6849136 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Gynecologic oncology care in the world of accountable care organizations.
Dorney K M KM Rao S K SK Sisodia R C RC Del Carmen M G MG
Gynecologic oncology reports 20191024
Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) are an example of alternative payment models that are becoming increasingly common in our healthcare system. ACOs focus on increasing value through cost reduction and improved outcomes, and historically focus on Medicare patients within primary care practices. As ACOs grow, attention will likely turn to costly subspecialty care as an area for improvement and standardization. This brief communication addresses the potential benefits and consequences of ACOs o ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMedicaid Accountable Care Organizations (ACO) are increasingly common, but the network breadth for maternity care is not well described. The inclusion of maternity care clinicians in Medicaid ACOs has significant implications for access to care for pregnant people, who are disproportionately insured by Medicaid.PurposeTo address this, we evaluate obstetrician-gynecologists (OB/GYN), maternal-fetal medicine specialists (MFM), certified nurse midwives (CNM), and acute care hospital inclusion in Massachusetts Medicaid ACOs.Methodology/approachUsing publicly available provider directories for Massachusetts Medicaid ACOs (n = 16) from December 2020 -January 2021, we quantify obstetrician-gynecologists, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, CNMs, and acute care hospital with obstetric department inclusion in each Medicaid ACO. We compare maternity care provider and acute care hospital inclusion across and within ACO type. For Accountable Care Partnership Plans, we compare maternity care clinician and acute care hospital inclusion to ACO enrollment.ResultsPrimary Care ACO plans include 1185 OB/GYNs, 51 MFMs, and 100% of Massachusetts acute care hospitals, but CNMs were not easily identifiable in the directories. Across Accountable Care Partnership Plans, a mean of 305 OB/GYNs (median: 97; range: 15-812), 15 MFMs (Median: 8; range: 0-50), 85 CNMs (median: 29; range: 0-197), and half of Massachusetts acute care hospitals (median: 23.81%; range: 10%-100%) were included.Conclusion and practice implicationsSubstantial differences exist in maternity care clinician inclusion across and within ACO types. Characterizing the quality of included maternity care clinicians and hospitals across ACOs is an important target of future research. Highlighting maternal healthcare as a key area of focus for Medicaid ACOs-including equitable access to high-quality obstetric providers-will be important to improving maternal health outcomes.
| S-EPMC9994708 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC4963149 | 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:OBJECTIVE:To calculate physician concentration levels for all U.S. markets using detailed data on integration and accountable care organization (ACO) participation. DATA SOURCE:2015 SK&A office-based physician survey linked to all commercial and public payer ACOs. STUDY DESIGN:We construct three separate Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) measures and plot their distributions. We then investigate how prevailing levels of concentration change when incorporating more detailed organizational features into the HHI measure. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Horizontal and vertical integration strongly influences measures of physician concentration; however, ACOs have limited impact overall. ACOs are often present in competitive markets, and only in a minority of these markets do ACOs substantively increase physician concentration. CONCLUSIONS:Monitoring ACO effects on physician competition will likely have to proceed on a case-by-case basis.
| S-EPMC5867079 | biostudies-other
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.
| S-EPMC4175644 | biostudies-literature
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.).
| S-EPMC4239654 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In 2012, a total of 32 organizations entered the Pioneer accountable care organization (ACO) program, in which providers can share savings with Medicare if spending falls below a financial benchmark. Performance differences associated with characteristics of Pioneer ACOs have not been well described.In a difference-in-differences analysis of Medicare fee-for-service claims, we compared Medicare spending for beneficiaries attributed to Pioneer ACOs (ACO group) with other beneficiaries (control group) before (2009 through 2011) and after (2012) the start of Pioneer ACO contracts, with adjustment for geographic area and beneficiaries' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. We estimated differential changes in spending for several subgroups of ACOs: those with and those without clear financial integration between hospitals and physician groups, those with higher and those with lower baseline spending, and the 13 ACOs that withdrew from the Pioneer program after 2012 and the 19 that did not.Adjusted Medicare spending and spending trends were similar in the ACO group and the control group during the precontract period. In 2012, the total adjusted per-beneficiary spending differentially changed in the ACO group as compared with the control group (-$29.2 per quarter, P=0.007), consistent with a 1.2% savings. Savings were significantly greater for ACOs with baseline spending above the local average, as compared with those with baseline spending below the local average (P=0.05 for interaction), and for those serving high-spending areas, as compared with those serving low-spending areas (P=0.04). Savings were similar in ACOs with financial integration between hospitals and physician groups and those without, as well as in ACOs that withdrew from the program and those that did not.Year 1 of the Pioneer ACO program was associated with modest reductions in Medicare spending. Savings were greater for ACOs with higher baseline spending than for those with lower baseline spending and were unrelated to withdrawal from the program. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others.).
| S-EPMC4475634 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAccountable care organizations have been successful in improving quality of care, but little is known about who is benefiting from accountable care organizations and through what mechanism. This study examined variation of potentially preventable hospitalizations for chronic conditions with coexisting depression in adults by hospital accountable care organization affiliation and care coordination strategies by race/ethnicity.MethodsData files of 11 states from 2015 State Inpatient Databases were used to identify potentially preventable hospitalizations for chronic conditions with coexisting depression by race/ethnicity; the 2015 American Hospital Association's Annual Survey was used to identify hospital accountable care organization affiliation; and American Hospital Association's Survey of Care Systems and Payment (collected from January to August 2016) was used to identify hospital Accountable care organizations affiliation and hospital-based care coordination strategies, such as telephonic outreach, and chronic care management. In 2019, multiple logistic regressions was used to test the probability of potentially preventable hospitalization by accountable care organization affiliation and race/ethnicity. The test was repeated on a subsample analysis of accountable care organization-affiliated hospitals by care coordination strategy.ResultsPreventable hospitalizations were significantly lower among accountable care organization-affiliated hospitals than accountable care organization-unaffiliated hospitals. Lower preventable hospitalization rates were observed among white, African American, Native American, and Hispanic patients. Effective care coordination strategies varied by patients' race. Results also showed variation of the adoption of specific care coordination strategies among accountable care organization-affiliated hospitals. Analysis further indicated effective care coordination strategies varied by patients' race.ConclusionsAccountable care organizations and specifically designed care coordination strategies can potentially improve preventable hospitalization rates and racial disparities among patients with depression. Findings support the integration of mental and physical health services and provide insights for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services risk adjustment efforts across race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status.
| S-EPMC7458155 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop an exploratory taxonomy of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) to describe and understand early ACO development and to provide a basis for technical assistance and future evaluation of performance.Data sources/study settingData from the National Survey of Accountable Care Organizations, fielded between October 2012 and May 2013, of 173 Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial payer ACOs.Study designDrawing on resource dependence and institutional theory, we develop measures of eight attributes of ACOs such as size, scope of services offered, and the use of performance accountability mechanisms. Data are analyzed using a two-step cluster analysis approach that accounts for both continuous and categorical data.Principal findingsWe identified a reliable and internally valid three-cluster solution: larger, integrated systems that offer a broad scope of services and frequently include one or more postacute facilities; smaller, physician-led practices, centered in primary care, and that possess a relatively high degree of physician performance management; and moderately sized, joint hospital-physician and coalition-led groups that offer a moderately broad scope of services with some involvement of postacute facilities.ConclusionsACOs can be characterized into three distinct clusters. The taxonomy provides a framework for assessing performance, for targeting technical assistance, and for diagnosing potential antitrust violations.
| S-EPMC4254130 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AbstractCollaborative care - primary care models combining care management, consulting behavioral health clinicians, and registries to target mental health treatment - is a cost-effective depression treatment model, but little is known about uptake of collaborative care in a national setting. Alternative payment models such as accountable care organizations (ACOs), in which ACOs are responsible for quality and cost for defined patient populations, may encourage collaborative care use.Determine prevalence of collaborative care implementation among ACOs and whether ACO structure or contract characteristics are associated with implementation.Cross-sectional analysis of 2017-2018 National Survey of ACOs (NSACO). Overall, 55% of ACOs returned a survey (69% of Medicare, 36% of non-Medicare ACOs); 48% completed at least half of core survey questions. We used logistic regression to examine the association between implementation of core collaborative care components - care management, a consulting mental health clinician, and a patient registry to track mental health symptoms - and ACO characteristics.Four hundred five National Survey of ACOs respondents answering questions on collaborative care implementation.Only 17% of ACOs reported implementing all collaborative care components. Most reported using care managers (71%) and consulting mental health clinicians (58%), =just 26% reported using patient registries. After adjusting for multiple ACO characteristics, ACOs responsible for mental health care quality measures were 15 percentage points (95% CI 5-23) more likely to implement collaborative care.Most ACOs are not utilizing behavioral health collaborative care. Including mental health care quality measures in payment contracts may facilitate implementation of this cost-effective model. Improving provider capacity to track and target depression treatment with patient registries is warranted as payment contracts focus on treatment outcomes.
| S-EPMC8270614 | biostudies-literature