The Comprehensive Primary Care Plus Model and Health Care Spending, Service Use, and Quality.

Importance: Implemented in 18 regions, Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+) was the largest US primary care delivery model ever tested. Understanding its association with health outcomes is critical in designing future transformation models. Objective: To test whether CPC+ was associated with lower health care spending and utilization and improved quality of care. Design, Setting, and Participants: Difference-in-differences regression models compared changes in outcomes between the year before CPC+ and 5 intervention years for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to CPC+ and comparison practices. Participants included 1373 track 1 (1 549 585 beneficiaries) and 1515 track 2 (5 347 499 beneficiaries) primary care practices that applied to start CPC+ in 2017 and met minimum care delivery and other eligibility requirements. Comparison groups included 5243 track 1 (5 347 499 beneficiaries) and 3783 track 2 (4 507 499 beneficiaries) practices, matched, and weighted to have similar beneficiary-, practice-, and market-level characteristics as CPC+ practices. Interventions: Two-track design involving enhanced (higher for track 2) and alternative payments (track 2 only), care delivery requirements (greater for track 2), data feedback, learning, and health information technology support. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prespecified primary outcome was annualized Medicare Part A and B expenditures per beneficiary per month (PBPM). Secondary outcomes included expenditure categories, utilization (eg, hospitalizations), and claims-based quality-of-care process and outcome measures (eg, recommended tests for patients with diabetes and unplanned readmissions). Results: Among the CPC+ patients, 5% were Black, 3% were Hispanic, 87% were White, and 5% were of other races (including Asian/Other Pacific Islander and American Indian); 85% of CPC+ patients were older than 65 years and 58% were female. CPC+ was associated with no discernible changes in the total expenditures (track 1: $1.1 PBPM [90% CI, -$4.3 to $6.6], P = .74; track 2: $1.3 [90% CI, -$5 to $7.7], P = .73), and with increases in expenditures including enhanced payments (track 1: $13 [90% CI, $7 to $18], P < .001; track 2: $24 [90% CI, $18 to $31], P < .001). Among secondary outcomes, CPC+ was associated with decreases in emergency department visits starting in year 1, and in acute hospitalizations and acute inpatient expenditures in later years. Associations were more favorable for practices also participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program and independent practices. CPC+ was not associated with meaningful changes in claims-based quality-of-care measures. Conclusions and Relevance: Although the timing of the associations of CPC+ with reduced utilization and acute inpatient expenditures was consistent with the theory of change and early focus on episodic care management of CPC+, CPC+ was not associated with a reduction in total expenditures over 5 years. Positive interaction between CPC+ and the Shared Savings Program suggests transformation models might be more successful when provider cost-reduction incentives are aligned across specialties. Further adaptations and testing of primary care transformation models, as well as consideration of the larger context in which they operate, are needed.

The Effect of Cataract Surgery on the Risk of Dementia: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: An advanced age and the female sex are widely recognized risk factors for both cataract and dementia. We investigated the effect of cataract surgery on the incidence of dementia in a Korean population aged ≥ 45 years with a previous diagnosis of cataract. METHODS: This nationwide cohort study was performed using Korean National Health Insurance Service data collected from 2006 to 2017. A total of 300,327 subjects aged ≥ 45 years with a history of cataract diagnosis but no previous diagnosis of dementia were analyzed. The relationship between cataract surgery and dementia was evaluated, applying a time-varying analysis to evaluate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values according to dementia. It was calculated via a multivariable Cox regression model, with adjustments for age, sex, visual acuity (VA), ocular and systemic comorbidities, and social factors (including body mass index, income, smoking, and drinking). RESULTS: In the multivariate analysis, the cataract surgery group showed a marginal difference in dementia development (HR 1.10 [95% CI 1.02-1.19]) because both cataract and dementia share common risk factors. However, in the subgroup analysis, men (HR 0.49 [95% CI 0.26-0.90]) and patients under 65 years of age (HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.79-0.99]) in the group with cataract surgery and good VA showed a significantly lower incidence of dementia. CONCLUSION: Through visual improvement, together with timely surgical intervention, the procedure can alleviate the risk of dementia in visually impaired patients, especially in younger and male patients.

Assessing patient, physician, and practice characteristics predicting the use of low-value services.

OBJECTIVE: To examine characteristics of beneficiaries, physicians, and their practice sites associated with greater use of low-value services (LVS) using LVS measures that reflect current care practices. DATA SOURCES: This study was conducted in the context of a large, nationwide primary care redesign initiative (Comprehensive Primary Care Plus), using Medicare claims data in 2018. STUDY DESIGN: We examined beneficiary-level total counts of LVS based on the existing 31 claims-based measures updated by excluding three services provided with diminishing frequency to Medicare beneficiaries and by replacing these with more recently identified LVS. We estimated hierarchical linear models with an extensive list of beneficiary, physician, and practice site characteristics to examine the contribution of characteristics at each level in predicting greater use of LVS. We also examined the proportion of variation in LVS use attributable to the set of characteristics at each level. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: The study included 5,074,642 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to 32,406 primary care physicians in 11,009 primary care practice sites. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patients with disabilities, end-stage renal disease, and those in regions with higher poverty rates receive 10 (standard error [SE] = 3.0), 80 (SE = 14.0), and 10 (SE = 1.0) more LVS per 1000 beneficiaries across all 31 measures combined than patients without such attributes, respectively. Greater physician comprehensiveness and an increase in the number of primary care practitioners at a practice were associated with 40 (SE = 20.0) and 20 (SE = 6.0) fewer LVS per 1000 beneficiaries, respectively. Yet, the explanatory variables we examined only account for 11 percent of the variation in LVS use, with most of the variation (87 percent) being due to unobserved differences at the beneficiary level. CONCLUSIONS: Unexplained residual variation, from underlying patient preferences and behavior of non-primary care providers, could be important determinants of LVS use.

Access to care and health insurance coverage for workers with disabilities: Outcomes by state-level responses to the ACA.

BACKGROUND: States had flexibility in their implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansions, which may have led to variation in coverage and changes in access to care for workers with disabilities. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: To examine differential trends in health insurance coverage and access to care among workers with disabilities by states' decisions about expanding Medicaid under the ACA. METHODS: We aggregated data from the National Health Interview Survey into groups by time period relative to ACA implementation: pre-ACA (2006-2009), early ACA (2010-2013), and later ACA (2014-2017). We produced health insurance and access statistics for each time period, by state-level Medicaid expansion status. RESULTS: Uninsurance rates decreased after 2014 in all states, regardless of the state's decision whether to expand Medicaid. There was a substantial increase after 2014 in the share of workers with disabilities covered by Medicaid in states that expanded in that year; in other states, workers with disabilities experienced larger increases in privately purchased coverage. At the same time, the share of workers with disabilities reporting cost-related barriers to care declined markedly in 2014 Medicaid expansion states, but it increased slightly in the non-expansion states. Structural barriers to accessing care increased in all states, with the smallest increase in 2014 expansion states. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid coverage and cost-related access to care improved significantly among workers with disabilities in 2014 Medicaid expansion states, both overall and relative to workers with disabilities in non-expansion states.

Hospital responses to price shocks under the prospective payment system.

Under the prospective payment system (PPS), hospitals receive a bundled payment for an entire episode of treatment based on diagnosis-related groups (DRG). Although there is ample evidence regarding the impact of the introduction of the PPS, there is little research on the effects of the ensuing changes in payment levels under the PPS. In 2005, the Medicare PPS changed its definition of payment areas from the Metropolitan Statistical Areas to the Core-Based Statistical Areas, generating substantial area-specific price shocks. Using these exogenous price variations, this study examines hospital responses to price changes under the PPS. The results demonstrate that, while the average payment amount significantly increases in the affected areas, no parallel trend is observed in admission volume, treatment intensity, and quality of services. Conversely, hospitals facing a price increase are more liable to the perverse incentives that the PPS is known to encourage, namely, selecting or shifting patients into higher-paying DRGs. These results suggest that paying a higher price for a given service may not induce hospitals to offer services of better quality, but can rather prompt even higher payments through other behavioral responses.