Accountable care organization initiatives to improve the cost and outcomes of specialty care.

OBJECTIVES: To assess initiatives to manage the cost and outcomes of specialty care in organizations that participate in Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs). STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of 2023 ACO survey data. METHODS: Analysis of responses to a 12-question web-based survey from 101 respondents representing 174 ACOs participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program or the Realizing Equity, Access, and Community Health ACO model in 2023. RESULTS: Improving specialist alignment was a high priority for 62% of the 101 respondents and a medium priority for 34%. Only 11% reported that employed specialists were highly aligned and 7% reported that contracted specialists were highly aligned. A subset of ACOs reported major efforts to engage specialists in quality improvement projects (38%) and to convene specialists to develop evidence-based care pathways (30%). They also reported supporting primary care physicians through providing specialist directories (44%), specialist e-consults (23%), and sharing specialist cost data (20%). The most common challenges reported were the influence of fee-for-service payment on specialist behavior (58%), lack of data to evaluate specialist performance (53%), and insufficient bandwidth or ACO resources to address specialist alignment (49%). CONCLUSIONS: Engaging specialists in accountable care is an emerging area for ACOs but one with numerous challenges. Making better data on specialist costs and outcomes available to Medicare ACOs is essential for accelerating progress.

Organizational Characteristics Associated with High Performance in Medicare's Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care Initiative.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Medicare plans to extend financial structures tested through the Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care (CEC) Initiative-an alternative payment model for maintenance dialysis providers-to promote high-value care for beneficiaries with kidney failure. The End-Stage Renal Disease Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs) that formed under the CEC Initiative varied greatly in their ability to generate cost savings and improve patient health outcomes. This study examined whether organizational or community characteristics were associated with ESCOs' performance. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We used a retrospective pooled cross-sectional analysis of all 37 ESCOs participating in the CEC Initiative during 2015-2018 (n=87 ESCO-years). Key exposures included ESCO characteristics: number of dialysis facilities, number and types of physicians, and years of CEC Initiative experience. Outcomes of interest included were above versus below median gross financial savings (2.4%) and standardized mortality ratio (0.93). We analyzed unadjusted differences between high- and low-performing ESCOs and then used multivariable logistic regression to construct average marginal effect estimates for parameters of interest. RESULTS: Above-median gross savings were obtained by 23 (52%) ESCOs with no program experience, 14 (32%) organizations with 1 year of experience, and seven (16%) organizations with 2 years of experience. The adjusted likelihoods of achieving above-median gross savings were 23 (95% confidence interval, 8 to 37) and 48 (95% confidence interval, 24 to 68) percentage points higher for ESCOs with 1 or 2 years of program experience, respectively (versus none). The adjusted likelihood of achieving above-median gross savings was 1.7 (95% confidence interval, -3 to -1) percentage points lower with each additional affiliated dialysis facility. Adjusted mortality rates were lower for ESCOs located in areas with higher socioeconomic status. CONCLUSIONS: Smaller ESCOs, organizations with more experience in the CEC Initiative, and those located in more affluent areas performed better under the CEC Initiative.

Implementation of collaborative care for depressive disorder treatment among accountable care organizations.

ABSTRACT: Collaborative care - primary care models combining care management, consulting behavioral health clinicians, and registries to target mental health treatment - is a cost-effective depression treatment model, but little is known about uptake of collaborative care in a national setting. Alternative payment models such as accountable care organizations (ACOs), in which ACOs are responsible for quality and cost for defined patient populations, may encourage collaborative care use.Determine prevalence of collaborative care implementation among ACOs and whether ACO structure or contract characteristics are associated with implementation.Cross-sectional analysis of 2017-2018 National Survey of ACOs (NSACO). Overall, 55% of ACOs returned a survey (69% of Medicare, 36% of non-Medicare ACOs); 48% completed at least half of core survey questions. We used logistic regression to examine the association between implementation of core collaborative care components - care management, a consulting mental health clinician, and a patient registry to track mental health symptoms - and ACO characteristics.Four hundred five National Survey of ACOs respondents answering questions on collaborative care implementation.Only 17% of ACOs reported implementing all collaborative care components. Most reported using care managers (71%) and consulting mental health clinicians (58%), =just 26% reported using patient registries. After adjusting for multiple ACO characteristics, ACOs responsible for mental health care quality measures were 15 percentage points (95% CI 5-23) more likely to implement collaborative care.Most ACOs are not utilizing behavioral health collaborative care. Including mental health care quality measures in payment contracts may facilitate implementation of this cost-effective model. Improving provider capacity to track and target depression treatment with patient registries is warranted as payment contracts focus on treatment outcomes.

Effect of Community Health Workers on 30-Day Hospital Readmissions in an Accountable Care Organization Population: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Value-based care within accountable care organizations (ACOs) has magnified the importance of reducing preventable hospital readmissions. Community health worker (CHW) interventions may address patients' unmet psychosocial and clinical care needs but have been underused in inpatient and postdischarge care. Objective: To determine if pairing hospitalized patients with ACO insurance with CHWs would reduce 30-day readmission rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted in 6 general medicine hospital units within 1 academic medical center in Boston, Massachusetts. Participants included adults hospitalized from April 1, 2017, through March 31, 2019, who had ACO insurance and were at risk for 30-day readmission based on a hospital readmission algorithm. The main inclusion criterion was frequency of prior nonelective hospitalizations (≥2 in the past 3 months or ≥3 in the 12 months prior to enrollment). Data were analyzed from February 1, 2018, through March 3, 2021. Intervention: CHWs met with intervention participants prior to discharge and maintained contact for 30 days postdischarge to assist participants with clinical access and social resources via telephone calls, text messages, and field visits. CHWs additionally provided psychosocial support and health coaching, using motivational interviewing, goal-setting, and other behavioral strategies. The control group received usual care, which included routine care from primary care clinics and any outpatient referrals made by hospital case management or social work at the time of discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 30-day hospital readmissions. Secondary outcomes included 30-day missed primary care physician or specialty appointments. Results: A total of 573 participants were enrolled, and 550 participants (mean [SD] age, 70.1 [15.7] years; 266 [48.4%] women) were included in analysis, with 277 participants randomized to the intervention group and 273 participants randomized to the control group. At baseline, participants had a mean (SD) of 3 (0.8) hospitalizations in the prior 12 months. There were 432 participants (78.5%) discharged home and 127 participants (23.1%) discharged to a short rehabilitation stay prior to returning home. Compared with participants in the control group, participants in the intervention group were less likely to be readmitted within 30 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.90) and to miss clinic appointments within 30 days (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38-0.81). A post hoc subgroup analysis showed that compared with control participants, intervention participants discharged to rehabilitation had a reduction in readmissions (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.03-0.31), but there was no significant reduction for those discharged home (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.41-1.12). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that pairing ACO-insured inpatient adults with CHWs reduced readmissions and missed outpatient visits 30 days postdischarge. The effect was significant for those discharged to short-term rehabilitation but not for those discharged home. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03085264.

Do accountable care organizations differ according to physician-hospital integration?: A retrospective observational study.

ABSTRACT: Physician-hospital integration among accountable care organizations (ACOs) has raised concern over impacts on prices and spending. However, characteristics of ACOs with greater integration between physicians and hospitals are unknown. We examined whether ACOs systematically differ by physician-hospital integration among 16 commercial ACOs operating in Massachusetts.Using claims data linked to information on physician affiliation, we measured hospital integration with primary care physicians for each ACO and categorized them into high-, medium-, and low-integrated ACOs. We conducted cross-sectional descriptive analysis to compare differences in patient population, organizational characteristics, and healthcare spending between the three groups. In addition, using multivariate generalized linear models, we compared ACO spending by integration level, adjusting for organization and patient characteristics. We identified non-elderly adults (aged 18-64) served by 16 Massachusetts ACOs over the period 2009 to 2013.High- and medium-integrated ACOs were more likely to be an integrated delivery system or an organization with a large number of providers. Compared to low-integrated ACOs, higher-integrated ACOs had larger inpatient care capacity, smaller composition of primary care physicians, and were more likely to employ physicians directly or through an affiliated hospital or physician group. A greater proportion of high-/medium-integrated ACO patients lived in affluent neighborhoods or areas with a larger minority population. Healthcare spending per enrollee in high-integrated ACOs was higher, which was mainly driven by a higher spending on outpatient facility services.This study shows that higher-integrated ACOs differ from their counterparts with low integration in many respects including higher healthcare spending, which persisted after adjusting for organizational characteristics and patient mix. Further investigation into the effects of integration on expenditures will inform the ongoing development of ACOs.

The Effects of Accountable Care Organizations Forming Preferred Skilled Nursing Facility Networks on Market Share, Patient Composition, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Through participation in payment reforms such as bundled payment and accountable care organizations (ACOs), hospitals are increasingly financially responsible for health care use and adverse health events occurring after hospital discharge. To improve management and coordination of postdischarge care, ACO hospitals are establishing a closer relationship with skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) through the formation of preferred SNF networks. RESEARCH DESIGN: We evaluated the effects of preferred SNF network formation on care patterns and outcomes. We included 10 ACOs that established preferred SNF networks between 2014 and 2015 in the sample. We first investigated whether hospitals "steer" patients to preferred SNFs by examining the percentage of patients sent to preferred SNFs within each hospital before and after network formation. We then used a difference-in-difference model with SNF fixed effects to evaluate the changes in patient composition and outcomes of preferred SNF patients from ACO hospitals after network formation relative to patients from other hospitals. RESULTS: We found that preferred network formation was not associated with higher market share or better outcomes for preferred SNF patients from ACO hospitals. However, we found a small increase in the average number of Elixhauser comorbidities for patients from ACO hospitals after network formation, relative to patients from non-ACO hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: After preferred SNF network formation, there is some evidence that ACO hospitals sent more complex patients to preferred SNFs, but there was no change in the volume of patients received by these SNFs. Furthermore, preferred network formation was not associated with improvement in patient outcomes.

Medicare Accountable Care Organizations and the Adoption of New Surgical Technology.

BACKGROUND: Dissemination of new surgical technology is a major contributor to healthcare spending growth. Accountable care organization (ACO) policy aims to control spending while maintaining quality. As a result, ACOs provide incentive for hospitals to selectively adopt newer procedures with high value. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a 20% sample of national Medicare claims from 2010 to 2015. We identified hospitals that performed 1 of 6 sets of procedures: abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, aortic valve replacement, carotid endarterectomy or stent, lung lobectomy, colectomy, and prostatectomy. We identified hospitals participating in a Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO and a set of matched non-ACO control hospitals. We used a difference-in-differences approach to compare rate of surgical treatment and use of newer surgical technology for each set of procedures in ACO and non-ACO hospitals. RESULTS: We included 707 ACO-hospitals and 1,770 control hospitals. ACO hospitals performed surgery for carotid stenosis at a lower rate than non-ACO hospitals. There was no difference in the rate of surgical treatment for all other procedure sets. ACO hospitals were less likely to use an endovascular approach for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (85.2% vs 88.2%, p < 0.001) and more likely to use a minimally invasive approach for lung lobectomy (42.2% vs 34.7%, p = 0.004) than non-ACO hospitals. In difference-in-differences analysis, ACO participation was not associated with any significant difference in use of surgical care for any of the 6 procedure sets, nor with any significant difference in use of newer surgical technology. CONCLUSIONS: Despite ACO policy incentives to selectively adopt newer surgical technology, ACO participation was not associated with differences in rate of surgery or use of newer surgical technology for 6 major surgical procedures.

Association Between Medicaid Expansion and Diagnosis and Management of Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act facilitated improved insurance coverage for states that expanded Medicaid coverage, but the impact on cancer outcomes is unclear. This study compared changes in the diagnosis and management of colon cancer in states that did and did not participate in Medicaid expansion. STUDY DESIGN: Using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences (DID) approach, we analyzed Medicaid and uninsured patients in the National Cancer Data Base during 2 time periods: pre (2011-2012) and post expansion (2015-2016). Patients in non-expansion states were compared with those in January 2014 expansion states with regard to changes in patient and facility characteristics, cancer staging, treatment decisions, and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Along with increased Medicaid coverage (DID = 20.27; p < 0.001), patients in expansion states had an increase in stage I diagnoses (DID = 2.97; p = 0.035), distance traveled (miles, DID = 6.67; p = 0.005), and treatment at integrated network programs (DID = 2.67; p = 0.045). More early-stage patients were treated within 30 days (DID = 7.24; p = 0.035) and more stage IV patients received palliative care (DID = 5.01; p = 0.048). Among surgical patients, Medicaid expansion correlated with fewer urgent cases (< 7 days, DID = -5.88; p = 0.008) and more minimally invasive surgery (DID = 5.00; p = 0.022). There were no observed differences in postoperative outcomes or adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion correlated with earlier diagnosis, enhanced access, and improved surgical care for colon cancer patients. These findings highlight the importance of improving health insurance coverage and can help guide future policy efforts.

A new kind of gatekeeper: The increasing prevalence of Advanced Practice Nurses as case managers in US hospitals.

Case management is a representation of managed care, cost-containment organizational practices in healthcare, where managed care and its constitutive parts are situated against physician autonomy and decision-making. As a professional field, case management has evolved considerably, with the role recently taken up increasingly by Advanced Practice Nurses in various health care settings. We look at this evolution of a relatively new work task for Advanced Practice Nurses using a countervailing powers perspective, which allows us to move beyond discussions of case management effectiveness and best practices, and draw connections to trends in the social organization of healthcare, especially hospitals. We evaluated organizational (hospital-level) and environmental (county and state-level) characteristics associated with hospitals' use of Advanced Practice Nurses as case managers, using data from U.S. community acute care hospitals for 2016-2018, collected from three data sources: American Hospital Association annual survey (AHA), Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and Area Resource File. Among organizational characteristics, we found that hospitals that are a part of established Accountable Care Organizations (OR = 2.55, p = 0.009; 95% CI = 1.26-5.14) and those that serve higher acuity patients, as indicated by possessing a higher Case Mix Index (OR = 1.32, p = 0.001; 95% CI = 1.13-1.55), were more likely to use Advanced Practice Nurses as case managers. Among environmental characteristics, having higher local Advanced Practice Nurses concentrations (OR = 1.24, p < 0.001; 95% CI = 1.11-1.39) was associated with hospital Advanced Practice Nurses case management service provision. Beyond the health impacts of Covid-19, its associated recession is placing families, governments and insurers under unprecedented financial stress. Governments and insurers alike are looking to reduce costs anywhere possible. This will inevitably result in increasing amounts of managed care, and decreasing reimbursements to hospitals, likely resulting in higher demand for APRN patient navigators.

Accountable Care Organizations during Covid-19: Routine care for older adults with multiple chronic conditions.

The COVID-19 pandemic threatens the health and well-being of older adults with multiple chronic conditions. To date, limited information exists about how Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) are adapting to manage these patients. We surveyed 78 Medicare ACOs about their concerns for these patients during the pandemic and strategies they are employing to address them. ACOs expressed major concerns about disruptions to necessary care for this population, including the accessibility of social services and long-term care services. While certain strategies like virtual primary and specialty care visits were being used by nearly all ACOs, other services such as virtual social services, home medication delivery, and remote lab monitoring were far less commonly accessible. ACOs expressed that support for telehealth services, investment in remote monitoring capabilities, and funding for new, targeted care innovation initiatives would help them better care for vulnerable patients during this pandemic.

Are ACOs Ready to be Accountable for Medication Use?

BACKGROUND: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have the potential to lower costs and improve quality through incentives and coordinated care. However, the design brings with it many new challenges. One such challenge is the optimal use of pharmaceuticals. Most ACOs have not yet focused on this integral facet of care, even though medications are a critical component to achieving the lower costs and improved quality that are anticipated with this new model. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether ACOs are prepared to maximize the value of medications for achieving quality benchmarks and cost offsets. METHODS: During the fall of 2012, an electronic readiness self-assessment was developed using a portion of the questions and question methodology from the National Survey of Accountable Care Organizations, along with original questions developed by the authors. The assessment was tested and subsequently revised based on feedback from pilot testing with 5 ACO representatives. The revised assessment was distributed via e-mail to a convenience sample (n=175) of ACO members of the American Medical Group Association, Brookings-Dartmouth ACO Learning Network, and Premier Healthcare Alliance. RESULTS: The self-assessment was completed by 46 ACO representatives (26% response rate). ACOs reported high readiness to manage medications in a few areas, such as transmitting prescriptions electronically (70%), being able to integrate medical and pharmacy data into a single database (54%), and having a formulary in place that encourages generic use when appropriate (50%). However, many areas have substantial room for improvement with few ACOs reporting high readiness. Some notable areas include being able to quantify the cost offsets and hence demonstrate the value of appropriate medication use (7%), notifying a physician when a prescription has been filled (9%), having protocols in place to avoid medication duplication and polypharmacy (17%), and having quality metrics in place for a broad diversity of conditions (22%). CONCLUSIONS: Developing the capabilities to support, monitor, and ensure appropriate medication use will be critical to achieve optimal patient outcomes and ACO success. The ACOs surveyed have embarked upon an important journey towards this goal, but critical gaps remain before they can become fully accountable. While many of these organizations have begun adopting health information technologies that allow them to maximize the value of medications for achieving quality outcomes and cost offsets, a significant lag was identified in their inability to use these technologies to their full capacities. In order to provide further guidance, the authors have begun documenting case studies for public release that would provide ACOs with examples of how certain medication issues have been addressed by ACOs or relevant organizations. The authors hope that these case studies will help ACOs optimize the value of pharmaceuticals and achieve the "triple aim" of improving care, health, and cost. DISCLOSURES: There was no outside funding for this study, and the authors report no conflicts of interest related to the article. Concept and design were primarily from Dubois and Kotzbauer, with help from Feldman, Penso, and Westrich. Data collection was done by Feldman, Penso, Pope, and Westrich, and all authors participated in data interpretation. The manuscript was written primarily by Westrich, with help from all other authors, and revision was done primarily by Lustig and Westrich, with help from all other authors.

Savings or Selection? Initial Spending Reductions in the Medicare Shared Savings Program and Considerations for Reform.

Policy Points Concerns have been raised about risk selection in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). Specifically, turnover in accountable care organization (ACO) physicians and patient panels has led to concerns that ACOs may be earning shared-savings bonuses by selecting lower-risk patients or providers with lower-risk panels. We find no evidence that changes in ACO patient populations explain savings estimates from previous evaluations through 2015. We also find no evidence that ACOs systematically manipulated provider composition or billing to earn bonuses. The modest savings and lack of risk selection in the original MSSP design suggest opportunities to build on early progress. Recent program changes provide ACOs with more opportunity to select providers with lower-risk patients. Understanding the effect of these changes will be important for guiding future payment policy. CONTEXT: The Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) establishes incentives for participating accountable care organizations (ACOs) to lower spending for their attributed fee-for-service Medicare patients. Turnover in ACO physicians and patient panels has raised concerns that ACOs may be earning shared-savings bonuses by selecting lower-risk patients or providers with lower-risk panels. METHODS: We conducted three sets of analyses of Medicare claims data. First, we estimated overall MSSP savings through 2015 using a difference-in-differences approach and methods that eliminated selection bias from ACO program exit or changes in the practices or physicians included in ACO contracts. We then checked for residual risk selection at the patient level. Second, we reestimated savings with methods that address undetected risk selection but could introduce bias from other sources. These included patient fixed effects, baseline or prospective assignment, and area-level MSSP exposure to hold patient populations constant. Third, we tested for changes in provider composition or provider billing that may have contributed to bonuses, even if they were eliminated as sources of bias in the evaluation analyses. FINDINGS: MSSP participation was associated with modest and increasing annual gross savings in the 2012-2013 entry cohorts of ACOs that reached $139 to $302 per patient by 2015. Savings in the 2014 entry cohort were small and not statistically significant. Robustness checks revealed no evidence of residual risk selection. Alternative methods to address risk selection produced results that were substantively consistent with our primary analysis but varied somewhat and were more sensitive to adjustment for patient characteristics, suggesting the introduction of bias from within-patient changes in time-varying characteristics. We found no evidence of ACO manipulation of provider composition or billing to inflate savings. Finally, larger savings for physician group ACOs were robust to consideration of differential changes in organizational structure among non-ACO providers (eg, from consolidation). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the original MSSP program was associated with modest savings and not with favorable risk selection. These findings suggest an opportunity to build on early progress. Understanding the effect of new opportunities and incentives for risk selection in the revamped MSSP will be important for guiding future program reforms.

Effective care management by Next Generation accountable care organizations.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to estimate the utilization and spending impact of a standardized complex care management program implemented at 5 Next Generation accountable care organizations (NGACOs) and to identify reproducible program features that influenced program effectiveness. STUDY DESIGN: In 2016 and 2017, high-risk Medicare beneficiaries aligned to 5 geographically diverse NGACOs were identified using predictive analytics for enrollment in a standardized complex care management program. We estimated the program's impact on all-cause inpatient admissions, emergency department visits, and total medical expenditures (TME) relative to a matched cohort of nonparticipants. In a subanalysis, we studied the modifying effects of intervention fidelity on program impact. METHODS: We created 1897 propensity score-matched case-control pairs based on preprogram similarities in disease profile, predictive risk score, medical cost, and utilization. Changes in outcomes 6 months post program were measured using difference-in-differences analyses. We used principal components analysis to identify program features associated with reduced inpatient admissions, classified cases according to intervention fidelity, and measured postprogram changes in TME for each subgroup. RESULTS: Program participation was associated with a 21% reduction in all-cause inpatient admissions (P = .03) and a 22% reduction in TME (P = .02) 6 months after program completion. Relative spending reductions were 2.1 times greater for high-fidelity interventions compared with overall program participation (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Centrally staffed complex care management programs can reduce costs and improve outcomes for high-risk Medicare beneficiaries. Integrating predictive risk stratification, evidence-based intervention design, and performance monitoring can ensure consistent outcomes.

Accountable care organizations are increasingly led by physician groups rather than hospital systems.

Because hospitals and health systems sponsored the majority of new accountable care organizations (ACOs) from 2010 to 2015, they influenced priorities and strategies of the policies designed to drive ACO adoption. In recent years, however, the majority of new ACOs have been sponsored by physician groups. This shift means that policies need to be developed with the characteristic strengths and weaknesses of physician-led ACOs in mind. Using data from the Leavitt Partners ACO database, we analyzed the types of providers becoming ACOs over time to look at their numbers and market potential. Because the market potential for further growth of physician group-led ACOs is much stronger than for hospital- or health system-led ACOs, policy makers need to create programs and policies that facilitate physician-led ACOs' success by helping them develop the capacity to take on risk, finance investments in high-value healthcare, and partner with other organizations to provide the full spectrum of care.

Proportion of Racial Minority Patients and Patients With Low Socioeconomic Status Cared for by Physician Groups After Joining Accountable Care Organizations.

Importance: The incentive structure of accountable care organizations (ACOs) may lead to participating physician groups selecting fewer vulnerable patients. Objective: To test for changes in the percentage of racial minority patients and patients with low socioeconomic status cared for by physician groups after joining the ACO. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort consisted of a 15% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to physician groups from 2010 to 2016. Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) participation was determined using ACO files. Analyses were conducted between January 1, 2019, and February 25, 2020. Exposures: Using linear probability models, we conducted difference-in-differences analyses based on the year a physician group joined an ACO to estimate changes in vulnerable patients within ACO-participating groups compared with nonparticipating groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: Whether the patient was black, was dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, and poverty and unemployment rates of the patient's zip code. Results: In a cohort of 76 717 physician groups caring for 7 307 130 patients, 16.1% of groups caring for 27.8% of patients participated in an MSSP ACO. Using 2010 characteristics, patients attributed to ACOs from 2012 to 2016, compared with those who were not, were less likely to be black (8.0% [n = 81 698] vs 9.3% [n = 270 924]) or dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid (12.8% [n = 130 957] vs 18.2% [n = 528 685]), and lived in zip codes with lower poverty rates (13.8% vs 15.5%); unemployment rates were similar (8.0% vs 8.5%). In the difference-in-differences analysis, there was no statistically significant change associated with ACO participation in the proportions of vulnerable patients attributed to ACO-participating groups compared with nonparticipating groups. After joining an ACO, ACO-participating groups had 0.0 percentage points change (95% CI, -0.1 to 0.1 percentage points; P = .59) for black patients, -0.1 percentage points (95% CI, -0.2 to 0.1 percentage points; P = .32) for patients dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, 0.2 percentage points (95% CI, -3.5 to 4.0 percentage points; P = .91) in poverty rates, and -0.4 percentage points (95% CI, -2.0 to 1.2 percentage points; P = .62) in unemployment rates. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, there were no changes in the proportions of vulnerable patients cared for by ACO-participating physician groups after joining an ACO compared with changes among nonparticipating groups.

A Sleeping Giant: Community Pharmacy's Potential Is Unrivaled.

DISCLOSURES: No funding was received for the writing of this commentary. The author has nothing to disclose.

The Power of Community: TMA Envisions Locally Focused ACO Model.

TMA is developing a promising, locally focused version of the accountable care organization (ACO) model that could help cover uninsured and underinsured Texans who fall in the gap or "hole" in the state's safety net: those who make too much money to qualify for Medicaid coverage as it's now administered in Texas, but also don't qualify for Medicare.