Dataset Information

Commentary: Quality nutrition care is integral to the Oncology Care Model.

ABSTRACT: The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is a US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) specialty model implemented in 2016, to provide higher quality, more highly coordinated oncology care at the same or lower costs. Under the OCM, oncology clinics enter into payment arrangements that include financial and performance accountability for patients receiving chemotherapy treatment. In addition, OCM clinics commit to providing enhanced services to Medicare beneficiaries, including care coordination, navigation, and following national treatment guidelines. Nutrition is a component of best-practice cancer care, yet it may not be addressed by OCM providers even though up to 80% of patients with cancer develop malnutrition and poor nutrition has a profound impact on cancer treatment and survivorship. Only about half of US ambulatory oncology settings screen for malnutrition, registered dietitian nutritionists (RDNs) are not routinely employed by oncology clinics, and the medical nutrition therapy they provide is often not reimbursed. Thus, adequate nutrition care in US oncology clinics remains a gap area. Some oncology clinics are addressing this gap through implementation of nutrition-focused quality improvement programs (QIPs) but many are not. What is needed is a change of perspective. This paper outlines how and why quality nutrition care is integral to the OCM and can benefit patient health and provider outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Arensberg MB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8550270 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Commentary: Quality nutrition care is integral to the Oncology Care Model.

Arensberg Mary Beth MB Besecker Beth B Weldishofer Laura L Drawert Susan S

Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer 20210723 12

The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is a US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) specialty model implemented in 2016, to provide higher quality, more highly coordinated oncology care at the same or lower costs. Under the OCM, oncology clinics enter into payment arrangements that include financial and performance accountability for patients receiving chemotherapy treatment. In addition, OCM clinics commit to providing enhanced services to Medicare beneficiaries, including care coordination, n ...[more]

PMID: 34297220

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceArtificial intelligence (AI) large language models (LLMs) demonstrate potential in simulating human-like dialogue. Their efficacy in accurate patient-clinician communication within radiation oncology has yet to be explored.ObjectiveTo determine an LLM's quality of responses to radiation oncology patient care questions using both domain-specific expertise and domain-agnostic metrics.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study retrieved questions and answers from websites (accessed February 1 to March 20, 2023) affiliated with the National Cancer Institute and the Radiological Society of North America. These questions were used as queries for an AI LLM, ChatGPT version 3.5 (accessed February 20 to April 20, 2023), to prompt LLM-generated responses. Three radiation oncologists and 3 radiation physicists ranked the LLM-generated responses for relative factual correctness, relative completeness, and relative conciseness compared with online expert answers. Statistical analysis was performed from July to October 2023.Main outcomes and measuresThe LLM's responses were ranked by experts using domain-specific metrics such as relative correctness, conciseness, completeness, and potential harm compared with online expert answers on a 5-point Likert scale. Domain-agnostic metrics encompassing cosine similarity scores, readability scores, word count, lexicon, and syllable counts were computed as independent quality checks for LLM-generated responses.ResultsOf the 115 radiation oncology questions retrieved from 4 professional society websites, the LLM performed the same or better in 108 responses (94%) for relative correctness, 89 responses (77%) for completeness, and 105 responses (91%) for conciseness compared with expert answers. Only 2 LLM responses were ranked as having potential harm. The mean (SD) readability consensus score for expert answers was 10.63 (3.17) vs 13.64 (2.22) for LLM answers (P < .001), indicating 10th grade and college reading levels, respectively. The mean (SD) number of syllables was 327.35 (277.15) for expert vs 376.21 (107.89) for LLM answers (P = .07), the mean (SD) word count was 226.33 (191.92) for expert vs 246.26 (69.36) for LLM answers (P = .27), and the mean (SD) lexicon score was 200.15 (171.28) for expert vs 219.10 (61.59) for LLM answers (P = .24).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, the LLM generated accurate, comprehensive, and concise responses with minimal risk of harm, using language similar to human experts but at a higher reading level. These findings suggest the LLM's potential, with some retraining, as a valuable resource for patient queries in radiation oncology and other medical fields.

Project description:ImportanceIn 2016, the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services initiated the Oncology Care Model (OCM), an alternative payment model designed to improve the value of care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries with cancer.ObjectiveTo assess the association of the OCM with changes in Medicare spending, utilization, quality, and patient experience during the OCM's first 3 years.Design, setting, and participantsExploratory difference-in-differences study comparing care during 6-month chemotherapy episodes in OCM participating practices and propensity-matched comparison practices initiated before (January 2014 through June 2015) and after (July 2016 through December 2018) the start of the OCM. Participants included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with cancer treated at these practices through June 2019.ExposuresOCM participation.Main outcomes and measuresTotal episode payments (Medicare spending for Parts A, B, and D, not including monthly payments for enhanced oncology services); utilization and payments for hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, office visits, chemotherapy, supportive care, and imaging; quality (chemotherapy-associated hospitalizations and ED visits, timely chemotherapy, end-of-life care, and survival); and patient experiences.ResultsAmong Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with cancer undergoing chemotherapy, 483 319 beneficiaries (mean age, 73.0 [SD, 8.7] years; 60.1% women; 987 332 episodes) were treated at 201 OCM participating practices, and 557 354 beneficiaries (mean age, 72.9 [SD, 9.0] years; 57.4% women; 1 122 597 episodes) were treated at 534 comparison practices. From the baseline period, total episode payments increased from $28 681 for OCM episodes and $28 421 for comparison episodes to $33 211 for OCM episodes and $33 249 for comparison episodes during the intervention period (difference in differences, -$297; 90% CI, -$504 to -$91), less than the mean $704 Monthly Enhanced Oncology Services payments. Relative decreases in total episode payments were primarily for Part B nonchemotherapy drug payments (difference in differences, -$145; 90% CI, -$218 to -$72), especially supportive care drugs (difference in differences, -$150; 90% CI, -$216 to -$84). The OCM was associated with statistically significant relative reductions in total episode payments among higher-risk episodes (difference in differences, -$503; 90% CI, -$802 to -$204) and statistically significant relative increases in total episode payments among lower-risk episodes (difference in differences, $151; 90% CI, $39-$264). The OCM was not significantly associated with differences in hospitalizations, ED visits, or survival. Of 22 measures of utilization, 10 measures of quality, and 7 measures of care experiences, only 5 were significantly different.Conclusions and relevanceIn this exploratory analysis, the OCM was significantly associated with modest payment reductions during 6-month episodes for Medicare beneficiaries receiving chemotherapy for cancer in the first 3 years of the OCM that did not offset the monthly payments for enhanced oncology services. There were no statistically significant differences for most utilization, quality, and patient experience outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence-based models are effective tools for informing quality improvement activities in health care. The Quality in Nutrition Care (QUINCE) model is an evidence-based model that describes quality nutrition care in the primary care setting but has not been applied to primary care dietetics. The present study comprised two phases. In the first phase, the study aimed to evaluate and compare healthcare consumers and professional perspectives on the importance of the 10 statements to understand their relevance for dietetics care. In the second phase, the study aimed to test and enhance the QUINCE model using healthcare consumer and professional responses to statements that were identified as relevant to primary care dietetics in the first phase.MethodsQuantitative and qualitative data were collected using an online survey comprising statements describing quality dietetic care adapted from the complexity literature. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistical analysis to investigate statement importance as rated by participants using a six-point Likert scale. Qualitative content analysis was performed on the qualitative data using a deductive-inductive approach to identify patterns in the data. The QUINCE model was compared with identified patterns and modified as appropriate.ResultsOne hundred and fourteen consumers and 107 primary care professionals agreed on the importance of seven statements but expressed divergent views on the remaining three statements that addressed: (1) access to medical records; (2) access to performance and safety information; and (3) variation in care between dietitians. The QUINCE model was modified to produce the Quality in Nutrition Care Model for Dietitians (QUINCE-MOD) describing quality dietetic care in the primary care setting.ConclusionsConsumers and professionals share views on some aspects of quality dietetic care but diverge on other aspects. The QUINCE-MOD is an evidence-based, complexity-informed model that describes components of quality relevant to primary care dietetics. The model should be applied at the practice level to reflect the unique perspective of quality at that level.

Dataset Information

Commentary: Quality nutrition care is integral to the Oncology Care Model.

Publications

Commentary: Quality nutrition care is integral to the Oncology Care Model.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets