Intensive care management of a complex Medicaid population: a randomized evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: Care management programs are employed by providers and payers to support high-risk patients and affect cost and utilization, with varied implementation. This study sought to evaluate the impact of an intensive care management program on utilization and cost among those with highest cost (top 5%) and highest utilization in a Medicaid accountable care organization (ACO) population. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled quality improvement trial of intensive care management, provided by a nonprofit care management vendor, for Medicaid ACO patients at 2 academic centers. METHODS: Patients were identified using claims, chart review, and primary care validation, then randomly assigned 2:1 to intervention and control groups. Among 131 patients included in intent-to-treat analysis, 87 and 44 were randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively. Patients in the intervention group were eligible to receive intensive care management in the community/home setting and, in some cases, home-based primary care. Patients in the control group received standard of care, including practice-based care management. Prespecified primary outcome measures included total medical expense (TME), emergency department (ED) visits, and inpatient utilization. RESULTS: Relative to controls, patients randomly assigned to receive intensive care management had a $1933 smaller increase per member per month in TME (P = .04) and directionally consistent but nonsignificant reductions in ED visits (17% fewer; P = .40) and inpatient admissions (34% fewer; P = .29) in the 12 months post randomization compared with the 12 months prerandomization. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results support that targeted, intensive care management can favorably affect TME in a health system-based high-cost, high-risk Medicaid population. Further research is needed to evaluate the impact on additional clinical outcomes.

Putting the puzzle pieces together: Adapting a population health infrastructure to Medicaid risk.

As Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) become more common within state Medicaid programs, health systems are increasingly facing the challenge of developing a population health approach for this population. This case report considers how health systems with a mature population health infrastructure evolve, adapt, and expand programs to take on Medicaid risk and better serve the Medicaid population. Four key implementation lessons were garnered from Partners HealthCare's experience that may be relevant for organizations undergoing similar transformations: 1) A significant portion of a health system's existing population health strategy can be applied to the Medicaid risk population; 2) Leveraging existing population health infrastructure can assist in adapting and adding programs; 3) Additional attention needs to be paid to behavioral health, substance use, and social determinants of health needs across existing and new programing; 4) Patients need to be engaged outside of the traditional primary care setting, including in the emergency department, and through home and community based care.

What Do High-Risk Patients Value? Perspectives on a Care Management Program.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in coordinating care for high-risk patients through care management programs despite inconsistent results on cost reduction. Early evidence suggests patient-centered benefits, but we know little about how participants engage with the programs and what aspects they value. OBJECTIVE: To explore care management program participants' awareness and perceived utility of program offerings. DESIGN: Cross-sectional telephone survey administered December 2015-January 2016. PARTICIPANTS: Patients enrolled in a Boston-area primary care-based care management program. MAIN MEASURES: Our main outcome was the number of topics in which patients reported having "very helpful" interactions with their care team in the past year. We analyzed awareness of one's care manager as an intermediate outcome, and then as a primary predictor of the main outcome, along with patient demographics, years in the program, attitudes, and worries as secondary predictors. KEY RESULTS: The survey response rate was 45.8% (n = 1220); non-respondents were similar to respondents. More respondents reported worrying about family (72.8%) or financial issues (52.5%) than about their own health (41.6%). Seventy-four percent reported care manager awareness, particularly women (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01-1.77) and those with more years in the program (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.30). While interaction rates ranged from 19.8% to 72.4% across topics, 81.3% rated at least one interaction as very helpful. Those who were aware of their care manager reported very helpful interactions on more topics (OR 2.77, 95% CI 2.15-3.56), as did women (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00-1.55), younger respondents (OR 0.98 for older age, 95% CI 0.97-0.99), and those with higher risk scores (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.06), preference for deferring treatment decisions to doctors (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.60-2.50), and reported control over their health (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.33-2.10). CONCLUSIONS: High-risk patients reported helpful interactions with their care team around medical and social determinants of health, particularly those who knew their care manager. Promoting care manager awareness may help participants make better use of the program.

Bending The Spending Curve By Altering Care Delivery Patterns: The Role Of Care Management Within A Pioneer ACO.

Accountable care organizations (ACOs) appear to lower medical spending, but there is little information on how they do so. We examined the impact of patient participation in a Pioneer ACO and its care management program on rates of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations and on Medicare spending. We used data for the period 2009-14, exploiting naturally staggered program entry to create concurrent controls to help isolate the program effects. The care management program (the ACO's primary intervention) targeted beneficiaries with elevated but modifiable risks for future spending. ACO participation had a modest effect on spending, in line with previous estimates. Participation in the care management program was associated with substantial reductions in rates for hospitalizations and both all and nonemergency ED visits, as well as Medicare spending, when compared to preparticipation levels and to rates and spending for a concurrent sample of beneficiaries who were eligible for but had not yet started the program. Rates of ED visits and hospitalizations were reduced by 6 percent and 8 percent, respectively, and Medicare spending was reduced by 6 percent. Targeting beneficiaries with modifiable high risks and shifting care away from the ED represent viable mechanisms for altering spending within ACOs.

Substantial Physician Turnover And Beneficiary 'Churn' In A Large Medicare Pioneer ACO.

Alternative payment models, such as accountable care organizations (ACOs), attempt to stimulate improvements in care delivery by better alignment of payer and provider incentives. However, limited attention has been paid to the physicians who actually deliver the care. In a large Medicare Pioneer ACO, we found that the number of beneficiaries per physician was low (median of seventy beneficiaries per physician, or less than 5 percent of a typical panel). We also found substantial physician turnover: More than half of physicians either joined (41 percent) or left (18 percent) the ACO during the 2012-14 contract period studied. When physicians left the ACO, most of their attributed beneficiaries also left the ACO. Conversely, about half of the growth in the beneficiary population was because of new physicians affiliating with the ACO; the remainder joined after switching physicians. These findings may help explain the muted financial impact ACOs have had overall, and they raise the possibility of future gaming on the part of ACOs to artificially control spending. Policy refinements include coordinated and standardized risk-sharing parameters across payers to prevent any dilution of the payment incentives or confusion from a cacophony of incentives across payers.

Development and Implementation of a Collaborative Team Care Model for Effective Insulin Use in an Academic Medical Center Primary Care Network.

Improving glycemic control across a primary care diabetes population is challenging. This article describes the development, implementation, and outcomes of the Diabetes Care Collaborative Model (DCCM), a collaborative team care process focused on promoting effective insulin use targeting patients with hyperglycemia in a patient-centered medical home model. After a pilot, the DCCM was implemented in 18 primary care practices affiliated with an academic medical center. Its implementation was associated with improvements in glycemic control and increase in insulin prescription longitudinally and across the entire population, with a >1% reduction in the proportion of glycated hemoglobin >9% at 2 years after the implementation compared with the 2 years prior ( P < .001). Facilitating factors included diverse stakeholder engagement, institutional alignment of priorities, awarding various types of credits for participation and implementation to providers, and a strong theoretical foundation using the principles of the collaborative care model.

Implementing a hybrid approach to select patients for care management: variations across practices.

OBJECTIVES: Appropriate selection of patients is key to the success of care management programs (CMPs). Hybrid patient selection approaches, in which large data assets are culled to develop a list of patients for more targeted clinical review, are increasingly common. We sought to describe the patient and practice characteristics associated with high-risk patient identification and selection for a CMP during clinical review, and to explore variation across primary care practices. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Standardized estimates of Medicare beneficiaries identified as high risk for poor outcomes and high medical expense, and appropriate for a CMP within a large Pioneer Accountable Care Organization, were developed using mixed effects logistic models. Study subjects were 2685 Medicare beneficiaries aged over 18 (includes individuals eligible for Medicare due to a disability) aligned to 35 primary care practices in 2013. RESULTS: Independent predictors of patient identification as high risk include older age; higher risk score; recent increases in medical conditions; higher numbers of medical hospitalizations, skilled nursing facility days, and primary care physician visits; and shorter relationships with the primary care physician. Older age, and lower income, but no prior hospice use were independently associated with patient selection for a CMP among the subset of patients identified as being high risk. Adjusted predicted percents of high-risk patients varied significantly across practices overall and for 5 of the 6 patient characteristics that were independently associated with identification as high risk. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistency in high-risk patient identification and selection for a CMP may reflect differences in practice resources, but also highlight the need for continual training and feedback in order to protect against unintentional biases.

Patient Population Loss At A Large Pioneer Accountable Care Organization And Implications For Refining The Program.

There is an ongoing move toward payment models that hold providers increasingly accountable for the care of their patients. The success of these new models depends in part on the stability of patient populations. We investigated the amount of population turnover in a large Medicare Pioneer accountable care organization (ACO) in the period 2012-14. We found that substantial numbers of beneficiaries became part of or left the ACO population during that period. For example, nearly one-third of beneficiaries who entered in 2012 left before 2014. Some of this turnover reflected that of ACO physicians-that is, beneficiaries whose physicians left the ACO were more likely to leave than those whose physicians remained. Some of the turnover also reflected changes in care delivery. For example, beneficiaries who were active in a care management program were less likely to leave the ACO than similar beneficiaries who had not yet started such a program. We recommend policy changes to increase the stability of ACO beneficiary populations, such as permitting lower cost sharing for care received within an ACO and requiring all beneficiaries to identify their primary care physician before being linked to an ACO.

Impact of rapid screening for discontinuation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus contact precautions.

BACKGROUND: A history of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a determinant of inpatient bed assignment. METHODS: We assessed outcomes associated with rapid testing and discontinuation of MRSA contact precautions (CP) in a prospective cohort study of polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based screening in the Emergency Department (ED) of Massachusetts General Hospital. Eligible patients had a history of MRSA and were assessed and enrolled if documented off antibiotics with activity against MRSA and screened for nasal colonization (subject visit). PCR-negative subjects had CP discontinued; the primary outcome was CP discontinuation. We identified semiprivate rooms in which a bed was vacant owing to the CP status of the study subject, calculated the hours of vacancy, and compared idle bed-hours by PCR results. Program costs were compared with predicted revenue. RESULTS: There were 2864 eligible patients, and 648 (22.6%) subject visits were enrolled. Of these, 65.1% (422/648) were PCR-negative and had CP discontinued. PCR-negative subjects had fewer idle bed-hours compared with PCR-positive subjects (28.6 ± 25.2 vs 75.3 ± 70.5; P < .001). The expected revenues from occupied idle beds and averted CP costs ranged from $214,160 to $268,340, and exceeded the program costs. CONCLUSION: A program of targeted PCR-based screening for clearance of MRSA colonization resulted in expected revenues and decreased CP costs that outweighed programmatic costs.

Communicate, don't litigate: The Schwartz Center Connections Program.

Little is known about effective educational approaches intended to reduce malpractice risk by improving communication with patients and among multidisciplinary teams in outpatient settings in order to prevent diagnostic delays and errors. This article discusses a prospective, controlled educational intervention that aimed to open lines of communication among teams in two disciplines: identifying how and why communication lapses occur between disciplines and with patients, and articulating strategies to avert them.

A controlled trial of population management: diabetes mellitus: putting evidence into practice (DM-PEP).

OBJECTIVE: Population-level strategies to organize and deliver care may improve diabetes management. We conducted a multiclinic controlled trial of population management in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We created diabetic patient registries (n = 3,079) for four primary care clinics within a single academic health center. In the intervention clinic (n = 898), a nurse practitioner used novel clinical software (PopMan) to identify patients on a weekly basis with outlying values for visit and testing intervals and last measured levels of HbA1c, LDL cholesterol, and blood pressure. For these patients, the nurse practitioner e-mailed a concise patient-specific summary of evidence-based management suggestions directly to primary care providers (PCPs). Population changes in risk factor testing, medication prescription, and risk factor levels from baseline (1 January 2000 to 31 August 2001) to follow-up (1 December 2001 to 31 July 2003) were compared with the three usual-care control clinics (n = 2,181). RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 65 years, were mostly white (81%), and the majority were insured by Medicare/Medicaid (62%). From baseline to follow-up, the increase in proportion of patients tested for HbA1c (P = 0.004) and LDL cholesterol (P < 0.001) was greater in the intervention than control sites. Improvements in diabetes-related medication prescription and levels of HbA1c, LDL cholesterol, and blood pressure in the intervention clinic were balanced by similar improvements in the control sites. CONCLUSIONS: Population-level clinical registries combined with summarized recommendations to PCPs had a modest effect on management. The intervention was limited by good overall quality of care at baseline and temporal improvements in all control clinics. It is unknown whether this intervention would have had greater impact in clinical settings with lower overall quality. Further research into more effective methods of translating population registry information into action is required.

Are research ethics standards satisfied in pediatric journal publications?

BACKGROUND: The requirements for institutional review board (IRB) review and informed consent (IC) for research involving human subjects have existed for more than 2 decades. Although many studies document them poorly, most published research undergoes IRB review and has IC procedures. Less is known about research published in pediatric journals, and how child health research is determined to be exempt. METHOD: All full-length articles published in the paper edition of 3 pediatric journals between January and December 2000 were examined. Articles were excluded if they were case studies, meta-analyses, lacked empirical data, or did not include at least 1 US researcher or US subjects. The remaining articles were examined to determine if they documented IRB review and IC mechanisms. If either or both of these features were missing, authors were asked to participate voluntarily in a survey. In addition, all exempt articles were examined to determine if the exemptions were in accordance with the federal regulations for the protection of human subjects. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-nine of 575 articles met inclusion criteria. One hundred ninety-seven (52.0%) documented IRB review, 164 (43.3%) documented IC, and 131 (34.6%) properly documented the presence of both IRB review and IC. Two hundred fifty-one researchers were surveyed to clarify IRB review and/or IC mechanisms. Approximately 13.5% of the research had not undergone IRB review, and 12.4% had not had their consent methods reviewed by an IRB. We found that between 26.9% and 39.8% of exempted research did not meet federal regulations requirements. CONCLUSIONS: We found that most research underwent IRB review and had a consent mechanism despite the lack of documentation in the articles. We also found that most research that did not undergo IRB review would have been exempt under current guidelines. However, a significant number of IRB- and researcher-exempted research were inappropriately classified. Improving research ethics standards will require additional education for researchers and IRB members, and greater adherence of researchers (and editors) to the journals' guidelines on these issues.