Dataset Information

Association between specialist compensation and Accountable Care Organization performance.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine if Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) using cost reduction measures in specialist compensation demonstrated better performance.

Data sources

National, cross-sectional survey data on ACOs (2013-2015) linked to public-use data on ACO performance (2014-2016).

Study design

We 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 findings

Of 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]).

Conclusion

Incentivizing 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.

SUBMITTER: Ganguli I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7518824 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

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: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.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs) account for half of program expenditures, whether ACOs are associated with surgical spending warrants further study.ObjectiveTo assess whether greater beneficiary-hospital ACO alignment was associated with lower surgical episode costs.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted between 2020 and 2022 using US Medicare data from a 20% random sample of beneficiaries. Individuals 18 years of age and older and without kidney failure who had a surgical admission between 2008 and 2015 were included. For each study year, distinction was made between beneficiaries assigned to an ACO and those who were not, as well as between admissions to ACO-participating and nonparticipating hospitals.ExposuresTime-varying binary indicators for beneficiary ACO assignment and hospital ACO participation and an interaction between them.Main outcomes and measuresNinety-day, price-standardized total episode payments. Multivariable 2-way fixed-effects models were estimated.ResultsDuring the study period, 2 797 337 surgical admissions (6% of which involved ACO-assigned beneficiaries) occurred at 3427 hospitals (17% ACO participating). Total Medicare payments for 90-day surgical episodes were lowest when ACO-assigned beneficiaries underwent surgery at a hospital participating in the same ACO as the beneficiary ($26 635 [95% CI, $26 426-$26 844]). The highest payments were for unassigned beneficiaries treated at participating hospitals ($27 373 [95% CI, $27 232-$27 514]) or nonparticipating hospitals ($27 303 [95% CI, $27 291-$27 314]). Assigned beneficiaries treated at hospitals participating in a different ACO and assigned beneficiaries treated at nonparticipating hospitals had similar payments (for participating hospitals, $27 003 [95% CI, $26 739-$27 267] and for nonparticipating hospitals, $26 928 [95% CI, $26 796-$27 059]). A notable factor in the observed differences in surgical episode costs was lower spending on postacute care services.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study evaluating hospital and beneficiary ACO alignment and surgical spending, savings were noted for beneficiaries treated at hospitals in the same ACO. Allowing ACOs to encourage or require surgical procedures in their own hospitals could lower Medicare spending on surgery.

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.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the long-run impact of a commercial accountable care organization (ACO) on prescription drug spending, utilization, and related quality of care.Data sources/study settingCalifornia Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) health maintenance organization (HMO) member enrollment data and pharmacy benefit claims, including both retail and mail-order generic and brand-name prescription drugs.Study designWe applied a longitudinal retrospective cohort study design and propensity-weighted difference-in-differences regression models. We examined the relative changes in outcome measures between two ACO cohorts and one non-ACO cohort before and after the ACO implementation in 2010. The ACO directed provider prescribing patterns toward generic substitution for brand-name prescription drugs to maximize shared savings in pharmacy spending.Data collection/extraction methodsThe study sample included members continuously enrolled in a CalPERS commercial HMO from 2008 through 2014 in the Sacramento area.Principal findingsThe cohort differences in baseline characteristics of 40 483 study participants were insignificant after propensity-weighting adjustment. The ACO enrollees had no significant differential changes in either all or most of the five years of the ACO operation for the following measures: (1) average total spending and (2) average total scripts filled and days supplied on either generic or brand-name prescription drugs, or the two combined; (3) average generic shares of total prescription drug spending, scripts filled or days supplied; (4) annual rates of 10 outpatient process quality of care metrics for medication prescribing or adherence.ConclusionsParticipation in the commercial ACO was associated with negligible differential changes in prescription drug spending, utilization, and related quality of care measures. Capped financial risk-sharing and increased generics substitution for brand names are not enough to produce tangible performance improvement in ACOs. Measures to increase provider financial risk-sharing shares and lower brand-name drug prices are needed.

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:ImportancePeople with complex needs account for a disproportionate amount of Medicare spending, partially because of fragmented care delivered across multiple practitioners and settings. Accountable care organization (ACO) contracts give practitioners incentives to improve care coordination to the extent that coordination initiatives reduce total spending or improve quality.ObjectiveTo assess the association between ACO-reported care management and coordination activities and quality, utilization, spending, and health care system interactions in older adults with complex needs.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cross-sectional study, survey information on care management and coordination processes from 244 Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs in the 2017-2018 National Survey of ACOs (of 351 Medicare ACO respondents; response rate, 69%) conducted from July 20, 2017, to February 15, 2018, was linked to 2016 Medicare administrative claims data. Medicare beneficiaries 66 years or older who were defined as having complex needs because of frailty or 2 or more chronic conditions associated with high costs and clinical need were included.ExposuresBeneficiary attribution to ACO reporting comprehensive (top tertile) care management and coordination activities.Main outcomes and measuresAll-cause prevention quality indicator admissions, 30-day all-cause readmissions, acute care and critical access hospital admissions, evaluation and management visits in ambulatory settings, inpatient days, emergency department visits, total spending, post-acute care spending, health care contact days, and continuity of care (from Medicare claims).ResultsAmong 1 402 582 Medicare beneficiaries with complex conditions, the mean (SD) age was 78 (8.0) years and 55.1% were female. Compared with beneficiaries assigned to ACOs in the bottom tertile of care management and coordination activities, those assigned to ACOs in the top tertile had identical median prevention quality indicator admissions and 30-day all-cause readmissions (0 per beneficiary across all tertiles), hospitalization and emergency department visits (1.0 per beneficiary in bottom and top tertiles), evaluation and management visits in ambulatory settings (14.0 per beneficiary [interquartile range (IQR), 8.0-21.0] in both tertiles), longer median inpatient days (11.0 [IQR, 4.0-33.0] vs 10.0 [IQR, 4.0-32.0]), higher median annual spending ($14 350 [IQR, $4876-$36 119] vs $14 229 [IQR, $4805-$36 268]), lower median health care contact days (28.0 [IQR, 17.0-44.0] vs 29.0 [IQR, 18.0-45.0]), and lower continuity-of-care index (0.12 [IQR, 0.08-0.20] vs 0.13 [IQR, 0.08-0.21]). Accounting for within-patient correlation, quality, utilization, and spending outcomes among patients with complex needs attributed to ACOs were not statistically different comparing the top vs bottom tertile of care management and coordination activities.Conclusions and relevanceThe ACO self-reports of care management and coordination capacity were not associated with differences in spending or measured outcomes for patients with complex needs. Future efforts to care for patients with complex needs should assess whether strategies found to be effective in other settings are being used, and if so, why they fail to meet expectations.

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.).