Dataset Information

Maternity care clinician inclusion in Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Medicaid 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.

Purpose

To 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/approach

Using 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.

Results

Primary 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 implications

Substantial 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.

SUBMITTER: Cooper MI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9994708 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Maternity care clinician inclusion in Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations.

Cooper Michael I MI Attanasio Laura B LB Geissler Kimberley H KH

PloS one 20230308 3

<h4>Background</h4>Medicaid 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.<h4>Purpose</h4>To address this, we evaluate obstetrician-gynecologists (OB/GYN), maternal-fetal medicine specialists (MFM), certified nurse midwives (CNM), and acute c ...[more]

PMID: 36888632

Similar Datasets

Project description:Policy Points Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Vermont leveraged State Innovation Model awards to implement Medicaid accountable care organizations (ACOs). Flexibility in model design, ability to build on existing reforms, provision of technical assistance to providers, and access to feedback data all facilitated ACO development. Challenges included sustainability of transformation efforts and the integration of health care and social service providers. Early estimates showed promising improvements in hospital-related utilization and Vermont was able to reduce or slow the growth of Medicaid costs. These states are sustaining Medicaid ACOs owing in part to provider support and early successes in generating shared savings. The states are modifying their ACOs to include greater accountability and financial risk.ContextAs state Medicaid programs consider alternative payment models (APMs), many are choosing accountable care organizations (ACOs) as a way to improve health outcomes, coordinate care, and reduce expenditures. Four states (Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Vermont) leveraged State Innovation Model awards to create or expand Medicaid ACOs.MethodsWe used a mixed-methods design to assess achievements and challenges with ACO implementation and the impact of Medicaid ACOs on health care utilization, quality, and expenditures in three states. We integrated findings from key informant interviews, focus groups, document review, and difference-in-difference analyses using data from Medicaid claims and an all-payer claims database.FindingsStates built their Medicaid ACOs on existing health care reforms and infrastructure. Facilitators of implementation included allowing flexibility in design and implementation, targeting technical assistance, and making clinical, cost, and use data readily available to providers. Barriers included provider concerns about their ability to influence patient behavior, sustainability of provider practice transformation efforts when shared savings are reinvested into the health system and not shared with participating clinicians, and limited integration between health care and social service providers. Medicaid ACOs were associated with some improvements in use, quality, and expenditures, including statistically significant reductions in emergency department visits. Only Vermont's ACO demonstrated slower growth in total Medicaid expenditures.ConclusionsFour states demonstrated that adoption of ACOs for Medicaid beneficiaries was both possible and, for three states, associated with some improvements in care. States revised these models over time to address stakeholder concerns, increase provider participation, and enable some providers to accept financial risk for Medicaid patients. Lessons learned from these early efforts can inform the design and implementation of APMs in other Medicaid programs.

Project description:ImportanceSeveral state Medicaid reforms are under way, but the relative performance of different approaches is unclear.ObjectiveTo compare the performance of Oregon's and Colorado's Medicaid Accountable Care Organization (ACO) models.Design, setting, and participantsOregon initiated its Medicaid transformation in 2012, supported by a $1.9 billion investment from the federal government, moving most Medicaid enrollees into 16 Coordinated Care Organizations, which managed care within a global budget. Colorado initiated its Medicaid Accountable Care Collaborative in 2011, creating 7 Regional Care Collaborative Organizations that received funding to coordinate care with providers and connect Medicaid enrollees with community services. Data spanning July 1, 2010, through December 31, 2014 (18 months before intervention and 24 months after intervention, treating 2012 as a transition year) were analyzed for 452 371 Oregon and 330 511 Colorado Medicaid enrollees, assessing changes in outcomes using difference-in-differences analyses of regional focus, primary care homes, and care coordination. Oregon's Coordinated Care Organization model was more comprehensive in its reform goals and in the imposition of downside financial risk.ExposuresRegional focus, primary care homes, and care coordination in Medicaid ACOs.Main outcomes and measuresPerformance on claims-based measures of standardized expenditures and utilization for selected services, access, preventable hospitalizations, and appropriateness of care.ResultsIn a total of 782 882 Medicaid enrollees, 45.0% were male, with mean (SD) age 16.74 (14.41) years. Standardized expenditures for selected services declined in both states during the 2010-2014 period, but these decreases were not significantly different between the 2 states. Oregon's model was associated with reductions in emergency department visits (-6.28 per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -10.51 to -2.05) and primary care visits (-15.09 visits per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -26.57 to -3.61), improvements in acute preventable hospital admissions (-1.01 admissions per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -1.61 to -0.42), 3 of 4 measures of access (well-child visits, ages 3-6 years, 2.69%; 95% CI, 1.20% to 4.19%; adolescent well-care visits, 6.77%; 95% CI, 5.22% to 8.32%; and adult access to preventive ambulatory care, 1.26%; 95% CI, 0.28% to 2.25%), and 1 of 4 measures of appropriateness of care (avoidance of head imaging for uncomplicated headache, 2.59%; 95% CI, 1.35% to 3.83%).Conclusions and relevanceTwo years into implementation, Oregon's and Colorado's Medicaid ACO models exhibited similar performance on standardized expenditures for selected services. Oregon's model, marked by a large federal investment and movement to global budgets, was associated with improvements in some measures of utilization, access, and quality, but Colorado's model paralleled Oregon's on several other metrics.

Project description:Introduction: Massachusetts established 17 new Medicaid accountable care organizations (ACOs) and 24 affiliated Community Partners (CPs) in 2018 as part of a large-scale healthcare reform effort to improve care value. The new ACOs will receive $1.8 billion dollars in state and federal funding over 5 years through the Delivery System Reform Incentive Program (DSRIP). The multi-faceted study described in this protocol aims to address gaps in knowledge about Medicaid ACOs' impact on healthcare value by identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation and sustainment of the DSRIP-funded programs. Methods and analysis: The study's four components are: (1) Document Review to characterize the ACOs and CPs; (2) Semi-structured Key Informant Interviews (KII) with ACO and CP leadership, state-level Medicaid administrators, and patients; (3) Site visits with selected ACOs and CPs; and (4) Surveys of ACO clinical teams and CP staff. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research's (CFIR) serves as the study's conceptual framework; its versatile menu of constructs, arranged across five domains (Intervention Characteristics, Inner Setting, Outer Setting, Characteristics of Individuals, and Processes) guides identification of barriers and facilitators across multiple organizational contexts. For example, KII interview guides focus on understanding how Inner and Outer Setting factors may impact implementation. Document Review analysis includes extraction and synthesis of ACO-specific DSRIP-funded programs (i.e., Intervention Characteristics); KIIs and site visit data will be qualitatively analyzed using thematic analytic techniques; surveys will be analyzed using descriptive statistics (e.g., counts, frequencies, means, and standard deviations). Discussion: Understanding barriers and facilitators to implementing and sustaining Medicaid ACOs with varied organizational structures will provide critical context for understanding the overall impact of the Medicaid ACO experiment in Massachusetts. It will also provide important insights for other states considering the ACO model for their Medicaid programs. Ethics and dissemination: IRB determinations were that the overall study did not constitute human subjects research and that each phase of primary data collection should be submitted for IRB review and approval. Study results will be disseminated through traditional channels such as peer reviewed journals, through publicly available reports on the mass.gov website; and directly to key stakeholders in ACO and CP leadership.

Project description:BackgroundIn 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.MethodsUsing 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.ResultsAdjusted 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.ConclusionsThe 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: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

Maternity care clinician inclusion in Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations.

Background

Purpose

Methodology/approach

Results

Conclusion and practice implications

Publications

Maternity care clinician inclusion in Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets