Maryland's Global Budget Revenue Payment Model and Shifts in the Surgical Site of Care Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between the Global Budget Revenue (GBR) payment model and shifts to the outpatient setting for surgical procedures among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in Maryland versus control states. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The GBR model provides fixed global payments to hospitals to reduce spending growth and incentivize hospitals to reduce the costs of care while improving care quality. Since surgical care is a major contributor to hospital spending, the GBR model might accelerate the ongoing shift from the inpatient to the outpatient setting to generate additional savings. METHODS: A difference-in-differences (DiD) design was used to compare changes in surgical care settings over time from pre-GBR (2011-2013) to post-GBR (2014-2018) for Maryland versus control states for common surgeries that could be performed in the outpatient setting. A cross-sectional approach was used to compare the difference in care settings in 2018 for total knee arthroplasty which was on Medicare's Inpatient-Only List before then. RESULTS: We studied 47,542 surgical procedures from 44,410 beneficiaries in Maryland and control states. GBR's 2014 implementation was associated with an acceleration in the shift from inpatient to outpatient settings for surgical procedures in Maryland (DiD: 3.9 percentage points, 95% CI: 2.3, 5.4). Among patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty in 2018, the proportion of outpatient surgeries in Maryland was substantially higher than that in control states (difference: 27.6 percentage points, 95% CI: 25.6, 29.6). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing Maryland's GBR payment model was associated with an acceleration in the shift from inpatient to outpatient hospital settings for surgical procedures.

Estimating oncologist variability in prescribing systemic cancer therapies to patients in the last 30 days of life.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical guidelines and quality improvement initiatives have identified reducing the use of end-of-life cancer therapies as an opportunity to improve care. We examined the extent to which oncologists differed in prescribing systemic therapies in the last 30 days of life. METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data, we identified patients who died of cancer from 2012 to 2017 (N = 17,609), their treating oncologists (N = 960), and the corresponding physician practice (N = 388). We used multilevel models to estimate oncologists' rates of providing cancer therapy for patients in their last 30 days of life, adjusted for patient characteristics and practice variation. RESULTS: Patients' median age at the time of death was 74 years (interquartile range, 69-79); patients had lung (62%), colorectal (17%), breast (13%), and prostate (8%) cancers. We observed substantial variation across oncologists in their adjusted rate of treating patients in the last 30 days of life: oncologists in the 95th percentile exhibited a 45% adjusted rate of treatment, versus 17% among the 5th percentile. A patient treated by an oncologist with a high end-of-life prescribing behavior (top quartile), compared to an oncologist with a low prescribing behavior (bottom quartile), had more than four times greater odds of receiving end-of-life cancer therapy (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 4.00-4.89). CONCLUSIONS: Oncologists show substantial variation in end-of-life prescribing behavior. Future research should examine why some oncologists more often continue systemic therapy at the end of life than others, the consequences of this for patient and care outcomes, and whether interventions shaping oncologist decision-making can reduce overuse of end-of-life cancer therapies.

Trends in Integration Between Physician Organizations and Pharmacies for Self-Administered Drugs.

Importance: Increasing integration across medical services may have important implications for health care quality and spending. One major but poorly understood dimension of integration is between physician organizations and pharmacies for self-administered drugs or in-house pharmacies. Objective: To describe trends in the use of in-house pharmacies, associated physician organization characteristics, and associated drug prices. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study was conducted from calendar years 2011 to 2019. Participants included 20% of beneficiaries enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Parts A, B, and D. Data analysis was performed from September 15, 2020, to December 20, 2023. Exposures: Prescriptions filled by in-house pharmacies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The share of Medicare Part D spending filled by in-house pharmacies by drug class, costliness, and specialty was evaluated. Growth in the number of physician organizations and physicians in organizations with in-house pharmacies was measured in 5 specialties: medical oncology, urology, infectious disease, gastroenterology, and rheumatology. Characteristics of physician organizations with in-house pharmacies and drug prices at in-house vs other pharmacies are described. Results: Among 8 020 652 patients (median age, 72 [IQR, 66-81] years; 4 570 114 [57.0%] women), there was substantial growth in the share of Medicare Part D spending on high-cost drugs filled at in-house pharmacies from 2011 to 2019, including oral anticancer treatments (from 10% to 34%), antivirals (from 12% to 20%), and immunosuppressants (from 2% to 9%). By 2019, 63% of medical oncologists, 20% of urologists, 29% of infectious disease specialists, 21% of gastroenterologists, and 22% of rheumatologists were in organizations with specialty-relevant in-house pharmacies. Larger organizations had a greater likelihood of having an in-house pharmacy (0.75 percentage point increase [95% CI, 0.56-0.94] per each additional physician), as did organizations owning hospitals enrolled in the 340B Drug Discount Program (10.91 percentage point increased likelihood [95% CI, 6.33-15.48]). Point-of-sale prices for high-cost drugs were 1.76% [95% CI, 1.66%-1.87%] lower at in-house vs other pharmacies. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of physician organization-operated pharmacies, in-house pharmacies were increasingly used from 2011 to 2019, especially for high-cost drugs, potentially associated with organizations' financial incentives. In-house pharmacies offered high-cost drugs at lower prices, in contrast to findings of integration in other contexts, but their growth highlights a need to understand implications for patient care.