Physician Group Practices Accrued Large Bonuses Under Medicare's Bundled Payment Model, 2018-20.

The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Advanced Model (BPCI-A), a voluntary Alternative Payment Model for Medicare, incentivizes hospitals and physician group practices to reduce spending for patient care episodes below preset target prices. The experience of physician groups in BPCI-A is not well understood. We found that physician groups earned $421 million in incentive payments during BPCI-A's first four performance periods (2018-20). Target prices were positively associated with bonuses, with a mean reconciliation payment of $139 per episode in the lowest decile of target prices and $2,775 in the highest decile. In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, mean bonuses increased from $815 per episode to $2,736 per episode. These findings suggest that further policy changes, such as improving target price accuracy and refining participation rules, will be important as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services continues to expand BPCI-A and develop other bundled payment models.

Using Consistently Low Performance to Identify Low-Quality Physician Groups.

Importance: There has been a growth in the use of performance-based payment models in the past decade, but inherently noisy and stochastic quality measures complicate the assessment of the quality of physician groups. Examining consistently low performance across multiple measures or multiple years could potentially identify a subset of low-quality physician groups. Objective: To identify low-performing physician groups based on consistently low performance after adjusting for patient characteristics across multiple measures or multiple years for 10 commonly used quality measures for diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used medical and pharmacy claims and laboratory data for enrollees ages 18 to 65 years with diabetes or CVD in an Aetna health insurance plan between 2016 and 2019. Each physician group's risk-adjusted performance for a given year was estimated using mixed-effects linear probability regression models. Performance was correlated across measures and time, and the proportion of physician groups that performed in the bottom quartile was examined across multiple measures or multiple years. Data analysis was conducted between September 2020 and May 2021. Exposures: Primary care physician groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: Performance scores of 6 quality measures for diabetes and 4 for CVD, including hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing, low-density lipoprotein testing, statin use, HbA1c control, low-density lipoprotein control, and hospital-based utilization. Results: A total of 786 641 unique enrollees treated by 890 physician groups were included; 414 655 (52.7%) of the enrollees were men and the mean (SD) age was 53 (9.5) years. After adjusting for age, sex, and clinical and social risk variables, correlations among individual measures were weak (eg, performance-adjusted correlation between any statin use and LDL testing for patients with diabetes, r = -0.10) to moderate (correlation between LDL testing for diabetes and LDL testing for CVD, r = .43), but year-to-year correlations for all measures were moderate to strong. One percent or fewer of physician groups performed in the bottom quartile for all 6 diabetes measures or all 4 cardiovascular disease measures in any given year, while 14 (4.0%) to 39 groups (11.1%) were in the bottom quartile in all 4 years for any given measure other than hospital-based utilization for CVD (1.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: A subset of physician groups that was consistently low performing could be identified by considering performance measures across multiple years. Considering the consistency of group performance could contribute a novel method to identify physician groups most likely to benefit from limited resources.

Private Equity and Urology: An Emerging Model for Independent Practice.

Independent urology practices are under increasing competitive pressure in a changing marketplace. By providing access to capital and business management expertise, private equity can help practices consolidate and scale to unlock new growth opportunities, navigate an increasingly complex regulatory environment, and institute best practice across a network, while retaining physician ownership and an opportunity for equity appreciation. This article examines the role of private equity in urology and the potential benefits of private equity investment. It also looks at what firms look for in investment partners, how to prepare for private equity investment, and how private equity investments are structured.

Group Medical Visit and Microfinance Intervention for Patients With Diabetes or Hypertension in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Incorporating social determinants of health into care delivery for chronic diseases is a priority. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of group medical visits and/or microfinance on blood pressure reduction. METHODS: The authors conducted a cluster randomized trial with 4 arms and 24 clusters: 1) usual care (UC); 2) usual care plus microfinance (MF); 3) group medical visits (GMVs); and 4) GMV integrated into MF (GMV-MF). The primary outcome was 1-year change in systolic blood pressure (SBP). Mixed-effects intention-to-treat models were used to evaluate the outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2,890 individuals (69.9% women) were enrolled (708 UC, 709 MF, 740 GMV, and 733 GMV-MF). Average baseline SBP was 157.5 mm Hg. Mean SBP declined -11.4, -14.8, -14.7, and -16.4 mm Hg in UC, MF, GMV, and GMV-MF, respectively. Adjusted estimates and multiplicity-adjusted 98.3% confidence intervals showed that, relative to UC, SBP reduction was 3.9 mm Hg (-8.5 to 0.7), 3.3 mm Hg (-7.8 to 1.2), and 2.3 mm Hg (-7.0 to 2.4) greater in GMV-MF, GMV, and MF, respectively. GMV and GMV-MF tended to benefit women, and MF and GMV-MF tended to benefit poorer individuals. Active participation in GMV-MF was associated with greater benefit. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy combining GMV and MF for individuals with diabetes or hypertension in Kenya led to clinically meaningful SBP reductions associated with cardiovascular benefit. Although the significance threshold was not met in pairwise comparison hypothesis testing, confidence intervals for GMV-MF were consistent with impacts ranging from substantive benefit to neutral effect relative to UC. Incorporating social determinants of health into care delivery for chronic diseases has potential to improve outcomes. (Bridging Income Generation With Group Integrated Care [BIGPIC]; NCT02501746).

General practitioners' income and activity: the impact of multi-professional group practice in France.

France has first experimented, in 2009, and then generalized a practice level add-on payment to promote Multi-Professional Primary Care Groups (MPCGs). Team-based practices are intended to improve both the efficiency of outpatient care supply and the attractiveness of medically underserved areas for healthcare professionals. To evaluate its financial attractiveness and thus the sustainability of MPCGs, we analyzed the evolution of incomes (self-employed income and wages) of General Practitioners (GPs) enrolled in a MPCG, compared with other GPs. We also studied the impacts of working in a MPCG on GPs' activity through both the quantity of medical services provided and the number of patients encountered. Our analyses were based on a quasi-experimental design, with a panel dataset over the period 2008-2014. We accounted for the selection into MPCG by using together coarsened exact matching and difference-in-differences (DID) design with panel-data regression models to account for unobserved heterogeneity. We show that GPs enrolled in MPCGs during the period exhibited an increase in income 2.5% higher than that of other GPs; there was a greater increase in the number of patients seen by the GPs' (88 more) without involving a greater increase in the quantity of medical services provided. A complementary cross-sectional analysis for 2014 showed that these changes were not detrimental to quality in terms of bonuses related to the French pay-for-performance program for the year 2014. Hence, our results suggest that labor and income concerns should not be a barrier to the development of MPCGs, and that MPCGs may improve patient access to primary care services.

Dermatology resident perspectives on practice ownership structures and private equity-backed group practices.

Recently, dermatology group practice ownership structures have changed, as private equity (PE) consolidates independent dermatology practices to create larger groups. Currently, little is known about how dermatology residents perceive practice ownership structures, including those that are owned by PE. One hundred thirty-seven residents from 32 dermatology residency programs responded to a 21-question anonymous survey. Approximately 65% of residents in this study were not open to working for PE-backed practices, and their negative perceptions of how PE influences quality of care, long-term salary, and physician autonomy were associated with their unwillingness to work at a PE-backed practice. Most residents in this study valued education about practice ownership structures, and approximately 43% of respondents did not feel adequately informed about practice options during residency. Future studies should evaluate how PE ownership of group practices influences practice parameters, including quality of patient care, physician autonomy, and long-term salary.

Association of Organizational Factors and Physician Practices' Participation in Alternative Payment Models.

Importance: Consolidation among physician practices and between hospitals and physician practices has accelerated in the past decade, resulting in higher prices in commercial markets. The resulting integration of health care across clinicians and participation in alternative payment models (APMs), which aim to improve quality while constraining spending, are cited as reasons for consolidation, but little is known about the association between integration and APM participation. Objective: To examine the association of organizational characteristics, ownership, and integration with intensity of participation in APMs among physician practices. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional descriptive study, adjusted for sampling and nonresponse weights, was conducted in US physician practice respondents to the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems conducted between June 16, 2017, and August 17, 2018; of 2333 responses received (response rate, 46.9%) and after exclusion of ineligible and incomplete responses, the number of practices included in the analysis was 2061. Data analysis was performed from April 1, 2019, to August 31, 2019. Exposures: Self-reported physician practice characteristics, including ownership, integration (clinical, cultural, financial, and functional), care delivery capabilities, activities, and environmental factors. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participation in APMs: (1) bundled payments, (2) comprehensive primary care and medical home programs, (3) pay-for-performance programs, (4) capitated contracts with commercial health plans, and (5) accountable care organization contracts. Results: A total of 49.2% of the 2061 practices included reported participating in 3 or more APMs; most participated in pay-for-performance and accountable care organization models. Covariate-adjusted analyses suggested that operating within a health care system (odds ratio [OR] for medical group: 2.35; 95% CI, 1.70-3.25; P < .001; simple health system: 1.46; 95% CI, 1.08-1.97; P = .02; and complex health system: 1.76; 95% CI, 1.25-2.47; P = .001 relative to independent practices), greater clinical (OR, 4.68; 95% CI, 2.28-9.59; P < .001) and functional (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 2.00-8.97; P < .001) integration, and being located in the Northeast (OR for Midwest: 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34-0.65; P < .001; South: 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34-0.66; P < .001; and West: 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46-0.91; P = .01) were associated with greater APM participation. Conclusions and Relevance: Greater APM participation appears to be supported by integration and system ownership.

Effects of Monetary Incentives in Physician Groups: A Systematic Review of Reviews.

BACKGROUND: Reimbursement systems that contribute to the cooperation and integration of providers have become increasingly important within the healthcare sector. Reimbursement systems not only serve as payment mechanisms but also provide control and incentive functions. Thus, the design of reimbursement systems is extremely important. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this systematic review were to describe and gain a better understanding of the effects of monetary incentives in the setting of physician groups. METHODS: In January 2020, we searched the MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit, and ISI Web of Science databases as well as the gray literature and authors' personal collections. RESULTS: We included 21 reviews containing seven different incentive schemes/initiatives. The study settings and outcome measures varied considerably, as did the results within the incentive schemes and initiatives. However, we found positive effects on process quality for two types of incentives: pay-for-performance and accountable care organizations. The main limitations of this review were the variations in study settings and outcome measures of the studies included. CONCLUSIONS: Monetary incentives in healthcare are often implemented as a control measure and are supposed to increase quality of care and reduce costs. The heterogeneity of the study results indicates that this is not always successful. The results reveal a need for research into the effects of monetary incentives in healthcare.

Trends in Direct Hospital Payments to Anesthesia Groups: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Nonacademic Hospitals in California.

BACKGROUND: In addition to payments for services, anesthesia groups in the United States often receive revenue from direct hospital payments. Understanding the magnitude of these payments and their association with the hospitals' payer mixes has important policy implications. METHODS: Using a dataset of financial reports from 240 nonacademic California hospitals between 2002 and 2014, the authors characterized the prevalence and magnitude of direct hospital payments to anesthesia groups, and analyzed the association between these payments and the fraction of anesthesia revenue derived from public payers (e.g., Medicaid). RESULTS: Of hospitals analyzed, 69% (124 of 180) made direct payments to an anesthesia group in 2014, compared to 52% (76 of 147) in 2002; the median payment increased from $242,351 (mean, $578,322; interquartile range, $72,753 to $523,861; all dollar values in 2018 U.S. dollars) to $765,128 (mean, $1,295,369; interquartile range, $267,006 to $1,503,163) during this time period. After adjusting for relevant covariates, hospitals where public insurers accounted for a larger fraction of anesthesia revenues were more likely to make direct payments to anesthesia groups (ß = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.81; P = 0.013), so that a 10-percentage point increase in the fraction of anesthesia revenue derived from public payers would be associated with a 4.5-percentage point increase in the probability of receiving any payment. Among hospitals making payments, our results (ß = 2.10; 95% CI, 0.74 to 3.45; P = 0.003) suggest that a 1-percentage point increase in the fraction of anesthesia revenue derived from public payers would be associated with a 2% relative increase in the amount paid. CONCLUSIONS: Direct payments from hospitals are becoming a larger financial consideration for anesthesia groups in California serving nonacademic hospitals, and are larger for groups working at hospitals serving publicly insured patients.

2018 John Charnley Award: Analysis of US Hip Replacement Bundled Payments: Physician-initiated Episodes Outperform Hospital-initiated Episodes.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) launched the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative in 2013 to create incentives to improve outcomes and reduce costs in various clinical settings, including total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study seeks to quantify BPCI initiative outcomes for THA and to determine the optimal party (for example, hospital versus physician group practice [PGP]) to manage the program. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is BPCI associated with lower 90-day payments, readmissions, or mortality for elective THA? (2) Is there a difference in 90-day payments, readmissions, or mortality between episodes initiated by PGPs and episodes initiated by hospitals for elective THA? (3) Is BPCI associated with reduced total Elixhauser comorbidity index or age for elective THA? METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis on the CMS Limited Data Set on all Medicare primary elective THAs without a major comorbidity performed in the United States (except Maryland) between January 2013 and March 2016, totaling more than USD 7.1 billion in expenditures. Episodes were grouped into hospital-run BPCI (n = 42,922), PGP-run BPCI (n = 44,662), and THA performed outside of BPCI (n = 284,002). All Medicare Part A payments were calculated over a 90-day period after surgery and adjusted for inflation and regional variation. For each episode, age, sex, race, geographic location, background trend, and Elixhauser comorbidities were determined to control for major confounding variables. Total payments, readmissions, and mortality were compared among the groups with logistic regression. RESULTS: When controlling for demographics, background trend, geographic variation, and total Elixhauser comorbidities in elective Diagnosis-Related Group 470 THA episodes, BPCI was associated with a 4.44% (95% confidence interval [CI], -4.58% to -4.30%; p < 0.001) payment decrease for all participants (USD 1244 decrease from a baseline of USD 18,802); additionally, odds ratios (ORs) for 90-day mortality and readmissions were unchanged. PGP groups showed a 4.81% decrease in payments (95% CI, -5.01% to -4.61%; p < 0.001) after enrolling in BPCI (USD 1335 decrease from a baseline of USD 17,841). Hospital groups showed a 4.04% decrease in payments (95% CI, -4.24% to 3.84%; p < 0.01) after enrolling in BPCI (USD 1138 decrease from a baseline of USD 19,799). The decrease in payments of PGP-run episodes was greater compared with hospital-run episodes. ORs for 90-day mortality and readmission remained unchanged after BPCI for PGP- and hospital-run BPCI programs. Patient age and mean Elixhauser comorbidity index did not change after BPCI for PGP-run, hospital-run, or overall BPCI episodes. CONCLUSIONS: Even when controlling for decreasing costs in traditional fee-for-service care, BPCI is associated with payment reduction with no change in adverse events, and this is not because of the selection of younger patients or those with fewer comorbidities. Furthermore, physician group practices were associated with greater payment reduction than hospital programs with no difference in readmission or mortality from baseline for either. Physicians may be a more logical group than hospitals to manage payment reduction in future healthcare reform. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, economic and decision analysis.

Radiologist Group Performance Reporting: Power in Numbers.

PURPOSE: Radiologists have historically participated as individuals in CMS pay-for-performance programs, but little is known about how radiologists perform under increasingly available group participation. We aimed to assess radiologists' relative national performance on CMS quality metrics using group versus individual participation. METHODS: Radiologists' group- and individual-level 2016 performance on Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) and non-PQRS Qualified Clinical Data Registry (QCDR) measures were obtained from the CMS national Physician Compare database and compared. RESULTS: Radiology groups reported an average 4.6 ± 2.0 quality measures; individual radiologists reported 2.3 ± 1.2 (P < .001). At least six measures were reported by 31.5% of groups versus 1.0% of individuals. Only one measure was reported by 5.4% of groups versus 33.0% of individuals. Groups reported 21 unique measures (20 via registries and one via QCDR). For 8 of the 11 measures reported by 20 or more groups, the average group performance rate was 3% or better than the average performance rate among radiologists participating as individuals (maximum 14% improvement with group participation versus individual participation for any individual measure). Group and individual performance were similar for the remaining three such measures. For measures reported by 20 or more groups in which a higher score indicates better performance, average group performance rates ranged from 86.2% to 98.9%. CONCLUSION: Compared with individual participation in CMS quality performance programs, radiologists participating as a group reported larger numbers of quality measures and achieved higher performance rates on those measures. Radiology practices seeking success under Medicare's new Quality Payment Program should carefully explore group participation.

Medicare Spending after 3 Years of the Medicare Shared Savings Program.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers who participate as an accountable care organization (ACO) in the voluntary Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) have incentives to lower spending for Medicare patients while achieving high performance on a set of quality measures. Little is known about the extent to which early savings achieved by ACOs in the program have grown and been replicated by ACOs that entered the program in later years. ACOs that are physician groups have stronger incentives to lower spending than hospital-integrated ACOs. METHODS: Using fee-for-service Medicare claims from 2009 through 2015, we performed difference-in-differences analyses to compare changes in Medicare spending for patients in ACOs before and after entry into the MSSP with concurrent changes in spending for local patients served by providers not participating in the MSSP (control group). We estimated differential changes (i.e., the between-group difference in the change from the pre-entry period) separately for hospital-integrated ACOs and physician-group ACOs that entered the MSSP in 2012, 2013, or 2014. RESULTS: MSSP participation was associated with differential spending reductions in physician-group ACOs. These reductions grew with longer participation in the program and were significantly greater than the reductions in hospital-integrated ACOs. By 2015, the mean differential change in per-patient Medicare spending was -$474 (-4.9% of the pre-entry mean, P<0.001) for physician-group ACOs that entered in 2012, -$342 (-3.5% of the pre-entry mean, P<0.001) for those that entered in 2013, and -$156 (-1.6% of the pre-entry mean, P=0.009) for those that entered in 2014. The corresponding differential changes for hospital-integrated ACOs were -$169 (P=0.005), -$18 (P=0.78), and $88 (P=0.14), which were significantly lower than for physician-group ACOs (P<0.001). Spending reductions in physician-group ACOs constituted a net savings to Medicare of $256.4 million in 2015, whereas spending reductions in hospital-integrated ACOs were offset by bonus payments. CONCLUSIONS: After 3 years of the MSSP, participation in shared-savings contracts by physician groups was associated with savings for Medicare that grew over the study period, whereas hospital-integrated ACOs did not produce savings (on average) during the same period. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging.).

The Complexity Of Billing And Paying For Physician Care.

The administrative costs of providing health insurance in the US are very high, but their determinants are poorly understood. We advance the nascent literature in this field by developing new measures of billing complexity for physician care across insurers and over time, and by estimating them using a large sample of detailed insurance "remittance data" for the period 2013-15. We found dramatic variation across different types of insurance. Fee-for-service Medicaid is the most challenging type of insurer to bill, with a claim denial rate that is 17.8 percentage points higher than that for fee-for-service Medicare. The denial rate for Medicaid managed care was 6 percentage points higher than that for fee-for-service Medicare, while the rate for private insurance appeared similar to that of Medicare Advantage. Based on conservative assumptions, we estimated that the health care sector deals with $11 billion in challenged revenue annually, but this number could be as high as $54 billion. These costs have significant implications for analyses of health insurance reforms.

Survey of Patch Test Business Models in the United States by the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) remains a significant burden of disease in the United States. Patch testing is the criterion standard for diagnosing ACD, but its use may be limited by reimbursement challenges. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the current rate of patch test utilization among dermatologists in academic, group, or private practice settings to understand different patch testing business models that address these reimbursement challenges. METHODS: All members of the American Contact Dermatitis Society received an online survey regarding their experiences with patch testing and reimbursement. RESULTS: A "yes" response was received from 28% of survey participants to the question, "Are you or have you been less inclined to administer patch tests or see patients needing patch tests due to challenges with receiving compensation for patch testing?" The most commonly reported barriers include inadequate insurance reimbursement and lack of departmental support. CONCLUSIONS: Compensation challenges to patch testing limit patient access to appropriate diagnosis and management of ACD. This can be addressed through a variety of innovative business models, including raising patch testing caps, negotiating relative value unit compensation, using a fixed salary model with directorship support from the hospital, and raising the percentages of collection reimbursement for physicians.

Efficiency of physician specialist groups.

This is the first study to use stochastic frontier analysis to simultaneously estimate the technical, cost and profit efficiency of physician practices for different physician specialist groups. We base our analysis on a unique panel data set of 4964 physician practices in Germany for the years 2008 to 2010. The data contains information on practice costs and revenues, services provided, as well as physician characteristics and practice characteristics. Additionally we consider a wide range additional variables not previously analyzed in this context (e.g. sub-specialization of physician groups and environmental factors such as physician density in the area). We investigate differences in cost, technical and profit efficiency utilizing production-/cost- and profit-functions with a translog functional form. We estimated the stochastic frontier using the comprehensive one-step approach for panel data following Battese and Coelli (Empir Econ 20(2): 325-332, 10). Overall findings indicate that participation in disease management programs and the degree of specialization are associated with significantly higher technical- cost-, and profit-efficiency for most physician specialist groups, e.g. due to the standardization of processes. In addition, our analyses show that group practices perform significantly better than single practices. This may be due to indivisibilities in expensive technical equipment, which can lead to different health care services being provided by different practice types. A more thorough look at specialist groups suggests that it is important to investigate all efficiency types for different physician groups, as results may depend on the type of efficiency analyzed as well as the physician group in question.

Hospital Ownership of Physicians: Hospital Versus Physician Perspectives.

Although there has been significant interest from health services researchers and policy makers about recent trends in hospitals' ownership of physician practices, few studies have investigated the strengths and weaknesses of available data sources. In this article, we compare results from two national surveys that have been used to assess ownership patterns, one of hospitals (the American Hospital Association survey) and one of physicians (the SK&A survey). We find some areas of agreement, but also some disagreement, between the two surveys. We conclude that full understanding of the causes and consequences of hospital ownership of physicians requires data collected at the both the hospital and the physician level. The appropriate measure of integration depends on the research question being investigated.

Profit efficiency of physician practices: a stochastic frontier approach using panel data.

While determinants of efficiency have been the subject of a large number of studies in the inpatient sector, relatively little is known about factors influencing efficiency of physician practices in the outpatient sector. With our study, we provide the first paper to estimate physician practice profit efficiency and its' determinants. We base our analysis on a unique panel data set of 4964 physician practices for the years 2008 to 2010. The data contains information on practice costs and revenues, services provided, as well as physician and practice characteristics. We specify the profit function of the physician practice as a translog functional form. We estimated the stochastic frontier using the comprehensive one-step approach for panel data of Battese and Coelli (1995). For estimation of the profit function, we regressed yearly profit on several inputs, outputs and input/output price relationships, while we controlled for a range of control variables such as patients' case-mix or share of patients covered by statutory health insurance. We find that participation in disease management programs and the degree of physician practice specialization are associated with significantly higher profit efficiency. In addition, our analyses show that group practices perform significantly better than single practices.

Critical Lessons From High-Value Oncology Practices.

IMPORTANCE: Cancer care is expensive. Cancer care provided by practice organizations varies in total spending incurred by patients and payers during treatment episodes and in quality of care, and this unnecessary variation contributes to the high cost. OBJECTIVE: To use the variation in total spending and quality of care to assess oncology practice attributes distinguishing "high value" that may be tested and adopted by others to produce similar results. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: "Positive deviance" was used in this exploratory mixed-methods (quantitative and qualitative) analysis of interview results. To quantify value, oncology practices located near the US Pacific Northwest and Midwest with low mean insurer-allowed spending were identified. Among those, practices with high quality were selected. A team then conducted site visits to interview practice personnel from June 2, 2015, through October 3, 2015, and to probe for attributes of high-value care. A qualitative analysis of their interview results was performed, and a panel of experienced oncologists was convened to review attributes occurring uniquely or frequently in low-spending practices for their contribution to value improvement and ease of implementation. Four positive deviant (ie, low-spending) oncology practices and 3 oncology practices that ranked near the middle of the spending distribution were studied. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Thematic saturation in a qualitative analysis of high-value care attributes. RESULTS: From the 7 oncology practices studied, 13 attributes within the following 5 themes emerged: treatment planning and goal setting, services supporting the patient journey, technical support and physical layout, care team organization and function, and external context. Five attributes (ie, conservative use of imaging, early discussion of treatment limitations and consequences, single point of contact, maximal use of registered nurses for interventions, and a multicomponent health care system) most sharply distinguished the high-value practice sites. The expert oncologist panel judged 3 attributes (ie, early and normalized palliative care, ambulatory rapid response, and early discussion of treatment limitations and consequences) to carry the highest immediate potential for lowering spending without compromising the quality of care. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Oncology practice attributes warranting further testing were identified that may lower total spending for high-quality oncology care.