How to Use Costs in Value-Based Healthcare: Learning from Real-life Examples.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare organizations measure costs for business operations but do not routinely incorporate costs in decision-making on the value of care. AIM: Provide guidance on how to use costs in value-based healthcare (VBHC) delivery at different levels of the healthcare system. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Integrated practice units (IPUs) for diabetes mellitus (DM) and for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) at the Leiden University Medical Center and a collaboration of seven breast cancer IPUs of the Santeon group, all in the Netherlands. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION: VBHC aims to optimize care delivery to the patient by understanding how costs relate to outcomes. At the level of shared decision-making between patient and clinician, yearly check-up consultations for DM type I were analyzed for patient-relevant costs. In benchmarking among providers, quantities of cost drivers for breast cancer care were assessed in scorecards. In continuous learning, cost-effectiveness analysis was compared with radar chart analysis to assess the value of telemonitoring in outpatient follow-up. DISCUSSION: Costs vary among providers in healthcare, but also between provider and patient. The joint analysis of outcomes and costs using appropriate methods helps identify and optimize the aspects of care that drive desired outcomes and value.

Primary Care Interventions to Prevent Child Maltreatment: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Child maltreatment, which includes child abuse and neglect, can have profound effects on health, development, survival, and well-being throughout childhood and adulthood. The prevalence of child maltreatment in the US is uncertain and likely underestimated. In 2021, an estimated 600 000 children were identified by Child Protective Services as experiencing abuse or neglect and an estimated 1820 children died of abuse and neglect. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of primary care-feasible or referable behavioral counseling interventions to prevent child maltreatment in children and adolescents younger than 18 years without signs or symptoms of maltreatment. Population: Children and adolescents younger than 18 years who do not have signs or symptoms of or known exposure to maltreatment. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of primary care interventions to prevent child maltreatment in children and adolescents younger than 18 years without signs or symptoms of or known exposure to maltreatment. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care interventions to prevent child maltreatment. (I statement).

Screening for Speech and Language Delay and Disorders in Children: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Speech and language delays and disorders can pose significant problems for children and their families. Evidence suggests that school-aged children with speech or language delays may be at increased risk of learning and literacy disabilities, including difficulties with reading and writing. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger. Population: Asymptomatic children 5 years or younger whose parents or clinicians do not have specific concerns about their speech, language, hearing, or development. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children who do not present with signs or symptoms or parent/caregiver concerns. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger without signs or symptoms. (I statement).

Interventions to Prevent Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Falls are the leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality among older adults in the US. In 2018, 27.5% of community-dwelling adults 65 years or older reported at least 1 fall in the past year and 10.2% reported a fall-related injury. In 2021, an estimated 38 742 deaths resulted from fall-related injuries. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and harms of primary care-relevant interventions to prevent falls and fall-related morbidity and mortality in community-dwelling adults 65 years or older. Population: Community-dwelling adults 65 years or older at increased risk of falls. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that exercise interventions provide a moderate net benefit in preventing falls and fall-related morbidity in older adults at increased risk for falls. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that multifactorial interventions provide a small net benefit in preventing falls and fall-related morbidity in older adults at increased risk for falls. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends exercise interventions to prevent falls in community-dwelling adults 65 years or older who are at increased risk for falls. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians individualize the decision to offer multifactorial interventions to prevent falls to community-dwelling adults 65 years or older who are at increased risk for falls. Existing evidence indicates that the overall net benefit of routinely offering multifactorial interventions to prevent falls is small. When determining whether this service is appropriate for an individual, patients and clinicians should consider the balance of benefits and harms based on the circumstances of prior falls, presence of comorbid medical conditions, and the patient's values and preferences. (C recommendation).

Screening for Breast Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Among all US women, breast cancer is the second most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer death. In 2023, an estimated 43 170 women died of breast cancer. Non-Hispanic White women have the highest incidence of breast cancer and non-Hispanic Black women have the highest mortality rate. Objective: The USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different mammography-based breast cancer screening strategies by age to start and stop screening, screening interval, modality, use of supplemental imaging, or personalization of screening for breast cancer on the incidence of and progression to advanced breast cancer, breast cancer morbidity, and breast cancer-specific or all-cause mortality, and collaborative modeling studies to complement the evidence from the review. Population: Cisgender women and all other persons assigned female at birth aged 40 years or older at average risk of breast cancer. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that biennial screening mammography in women aged 40 to 74 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older and the balance of benefits and harms of supplemental screening for breast cancer with breast ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), regardless of breast density. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 40 to 74 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of supplemental screening for breast cancer using breast ultrasonography or MRI in women identified to have dense breasts on an otherwise negative screening mammogram. (I statement).

Interventions for High Body Mass Index in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Approximately 19.7% of children and adolescents aged 2 to 19 years in the US have a body mass index (BMI) at or above the 95th percentile for age and sex, based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts from 2000. The prevalence of high BMI increases with age and is higher among Hispanic/Latino, Native American/Alaska Native, and non-Hispanic Black children and adolescents and children from lower-income families. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the evidence on interventions (behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy) for weight loss or weight management in children and adolescents that can be provided in or referred from a primary care setting. Population: Children and adolescents 6 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that providing or referring children and adolescents 6 years or older with a high BMI to comprehensive, intensive behavioral interventions has a moderate net benefit. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians provide or refer children and adolescents 6 years or older with a high BMI (≥95th percentile for age and sex) to comprehensive, intensive behavioral interventions. (B recommendation).

Screening for Lipid Disorders in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Familial hypercholesterolemia and multifactorial dyslipidemia are 2 conditions that cause abnormally high lipid levels in children, which can lead to premature cardiovascular events (eg, myocardial infarction and stroke) and death in adulthood. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for lipid disorders in asymptomatic children and adolescents. Population: Asymptomatic children and adolescents 20 years or younger without a known diagnosis of a lipid disorder. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient and the balance of benefits and harms for screening for lipid disorders in asymptomatic children and adolescents 20 years or younger cannot be determined. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for lipid disorders in children and adolescents 20 years or younger. (I statement).

Preexposure Prophylaxis to Prevent Acquisition of HIV: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: An estimated 1.2 million persons in the US currently have HIV, and more than 760 000 persons have died of complications related to HIV since the first cases were reported in 1981. Although treatable, HIV is not curable and has significant health consequences. Therefore, effective strategies to prevent HIV are an important public health and clinical priority. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of preexposure prophylaxis with antiretroviral therapy for the prevention of HIV acquisition, and the diagnostic accuracy of risk assessment tools to identify persons at increased risk of HIV acquisition. Population: Adolescents and adults who do not have HIV and are at increased risk of HIV. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that there is a substantial net benefit from the use of effective antiretroviral therapy to reduce the risk of acquisition of HIV in persons at increased risk of acquiring HIV. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians prescribe preexposure prophylaxis using effective antiretroviral therapy to persons at increased risk of HIV acquisition to decrease the risk of acquiring HIV. (A recommendation).

Screening for Anxiety Disorders in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Anxiety disorders are commonly occurring mental health conditions. They are often unrecognized in primary care settings and substantial delays in treatment initiation occur. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in asymptomatic adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for anxiety disorders in older adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in older adults. (I statement).

Screening for Depression and Suicide Risk in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Major depressive disorder (MDD), a common mental disorder in the US, may have substantial impact on the lives of affected individuals. If left untreated, MDD can interfere with daily functioning and can also be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, exacerbation of comorbid conditions, or increased mortality. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in asymptomatic adults that would be applicable to primary care settings. Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for MDD in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms of screening for suicide risk in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (I statement).

Screening for Skin Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Skin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the US. There are different types of skin cancer varying in disease incidence and severity. Basal and squamous cell carcinomas are the most common types of skin cancer but infrequently lead to death or substantial morbidity. Melanomas represent about 1% of skin cancer and cause the most skin cancer deaths. Melanoma is about 30 times more common in White persons than in Black persons. However, persons with darker skin color are often diagnosed at later stages, when skin cancer is more difficult to treat. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the benefits and harms of screening for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults. Population: Asymptomatic adolescents and adults who do not have a history of premalignant or malignant skin lesions. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in adolescents and adults. (I statement).

Screening and Preventive Interventions for Oral Health in Children and Adolescents Aged 5 to 17 Years: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Oral health is fundamental to health and well-being across the lifespan. Oral health conditions affect the daily lives of school-age children and adolescents, leading to loss of more than 51 million school hours every year. Untreated oral health conditions in children can lead to serious infections and affect growth, development, and quality of life. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening and preventive interventions for oral health conditions in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Population: Asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Recommendations: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries, in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries, in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. (I statement).

Screening and Preventive Interventions for Oral Health in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Oral health is fundamental to health and well-being across the life span. Dental caries (cavities) and periodontal disease (gum disease) are common and often untreated oral health conditions that affect eating, speaking, learning, smiling, and employment potential. Untreated oral health conditions can lead to tooth loss, irreversible tooth damage, and other serious adverse health outcomes. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening and preventive interventions for oral health conditions in adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries or periodontal disease) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic adults. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries or periodontal disease) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic adults. Recommendations: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries or periodontal-related disease, in adults. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries or periodontal-related disease, in adults. (I statement).

Folic Acid Supplementation to Prevent Neural Tube Defects: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Neural tube defects are among the most common congenital malformations in the US, with an estimated 3000 pregnancies affected each year. Many of these neural tube defects are caused by low folate levels in the body. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update on the benefits and harms of folic acid supplementation. Population: Persons who are planning to or could become pregnant. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that, for persons who are planning to or could become pregnant, there is high certainty that folic acid supplementation has a substantial net benefit to prevent neural tube defects in their offspring. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that all persons planning to or who could become pregnant take a daily supplement containing 0.4 to 0.8 mg (400 to 800 µg) of folic acid. (A recommendation).

Screening for Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: US Preventive Services Task Force Final Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality in the US. The rate of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy has been increasing from approximately 500 cases per 10 000 deliveries in 1993 to 1021 cases per 10 000 deliveries in 2016 to 2017. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Population: Pregnant persons without a known diagnosis of a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy or chronic hypertension. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy with blood pressure measurements has substantial net benefit. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for hypertensive disorders in pregnant persons with blood pressure measurements throughout pregnancy. (B recommendation).

Hepatitis C Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceptions Among People With HIV in South Texas.

Direct-acting antivirals are overwhelmingly effective in curing hepatitis C (HCV). Barriers to HCV treatment exist for those co-infected with both HIV and HCV. Southern states represent the epicenter of the HIV epidemic in the United States. This study assessed HCV knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions in 318 co-infected individuals attending Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (RWHAP) clinics in three South Texas cities. Two groups were compared, those tested for HCV and aware of their results (Group 1) and those uncertain if they were tested or tested and unaware of their results (Group 2). HCV knowledge was poor overall. Group 1 had a significantly higher mean HCV knowledge score than Group 2 by t-test (48.6 vs. 38.8; p < .01), but not by multivariable linear regression (p=.14). Factors predictive of greater HCV knowledge included self-identification as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and post high school educational attainment. Significantly more in Group 1 compared with Group 2 agreed that HCV medications would keep a person healthier for longer. Spanish speakers were more likely to disagree with a statement that people of color receive the same treatment for hepatitis C as white people. Study limitations identified include poor generalizability to people with HIV (PWH) receiving care in non-RWHAP settings and rural communities. Despite limitations, this study augments the paucity of information about knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of HCV in PWH and can inform interventions to combat barriers to HCV treatment and to maximize opportunities for HCV screening, diagnosis, and linkage to curative care.

Risk of respiratory, gastrointestinal, and constitutional health symptoms: A cross-sectional study of Texas adolescent and young adult nicotine and marijuana vapers.

Observational studies investigating the health consequences of vaping among youth and young adults are limited. This study aimed to describe and examine the risk for health symptoms by vape user category (never users, marijuana only, nicotine only, and dual users). Health symptoms included adverse respiratory, gastrointestinal, and constitutional problems. This cross-sectional study analyzed data from Fall 2020, Wave 12 (n = 2389) of the Texas Adolescent Tobacco and Marketing Surveillance System. Chi-square, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and multivariable logistic regression analyses examined the associations between past 30-day vape user category and 15 health symptoms (e.g., coughing, nausea, vomiting, fever). For total symptoms, dual vapers reported the highest mean (2.76[standard deviation = 3.17]), followed by nicotine-only vapers (2.47[2.89]), marijuana-only vapers (1.94[2.60]), and never users (1.56[2.31]), p < .001. Dual vapers and nicotine-only vapers had significantly higher odds of experiencing respiratory symptoms as compared with never users (adjusted odds ratios [AORs] = 2.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.30, 4.25; AOR = 1.86, 95% CI: 1.22, 2.81, respectively). Marijuana-only (AOR = 2.41, 95% CI: 1.53, 3.79), nicotine-only (AOR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.38, 2.99), and dual vapers (AOR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.15, 3.57) had significantly higher odds of gastrointestinal symptoms compared with never users. Dual vapers had significantly higher odds of experiencing constitutional symptoms as compared to never users (AOR = 1.92, 95% CI: 1.10, 3.34). This study uniquely highlights the risk for gastrointestinal symptoms from vaping. Future research and clinical practice should monitor the occurrence of these symptoms and explore potential mechanisms, such as specific flavorings or chemicals, for the link between vaping and health symptoms.

Chronic Pain and Psychological Distress Among Undocumented Latinx Immigrants in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Undocumented immigration is often accompanied by multiple and complex stressors, which over time may increase the risk for chronic pain. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the prevalence of chronic pain and its association with psychological distress among undocumented Latinx immigrants in the USA. DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: We used respondent-driven sampling to collect and analyze data from clinical interviews with 254 undocumented Latinx immigrants, enabling inference to a population of 22,000. MAIN MEASURES: Chronic pain was assessed using the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) Chronic Conditions Module. For all analyses, inferential statistics accounted for design effects and sample weights to produce weighted estimates. We conducted logistic regression analyses to assess the association between chronic pain and psychological distress after controlling for age, years in the USA, and history of trauma. RESULTS: A total of 28% of undocumented Latinx immigrants reported having chronic pain, and 20% of those had clinically significant psychological distress. Significant differences in the prevalence of chronic pain were reported across age groups, years in the USA, and trauma history. After controlling for relevant covariates, chronic pain was significantly associated with psychological distress (OR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.02, 1.09]), age (OR = 1.05, 95% CI [1.02; 1.09]), and history of trauma (OR = 1.10 per additional traumatic event, 95% CI [1.02; 1.19]; C-statistic = 0.79). CONCLUSION: Among undocumented Latinx immigrants, chronic pain is significantly associated with psychological distress, older age, and trauma history. Given that undocumented immigrants have restricted access to healthcare and are at high risk for chronic pain, developing alternatives to facilitate access to chronic pain interventions and risk-reduction prevention are needed.

Development of an E-Cigarettes Education and Cessation Program: A South Texas Oral Health Network Study.

Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use, or vaping, among youth and young adults has become a major public health concern. The prevalence of vaping has grown an astounding 900% among high school students from 2011 to 2015, and e-cigarette use among high school students has increased by 78% from 2017 to 2018, largely due to the rise in popularity of the high-dose nicotine product, JUUL. To date, there are few evidence-based e-cigarette cessation programs. To address this need, the South Texas Oral Health Network collaborated with dental practitioners and community members to conduct focus groups assessing knowledge and awareness of e-cigarette use. Based on this feedback, we developed a dental practitioner-based e-cigarette cessation program. The next step will be to utilize this program in a practice-based research network, a "real-world" practice setting that has the potential to increase the number of dental practitioners who counsel their patients about ecigarettes.

Value-Based Health Care Meets Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Value-based health care (VBHC) has recently emerged as a prominent movement within health care. Value-based health care focuses on maximizing outcomes achieved per dollar spent. As such, it bears many similarities to a well-established method, cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), which provides a framework for comparing the relative value of different diagnostic or treatment interventions. Both approaches address "bang for the health care buck," but although they overlap in many ways, VBHC and CEA differ with regard to their main applications, their perspective, and the types of costs and outcomes they consider. For example, CEA generally considers costs and benefits from the societal or health care sector perspectives, whereas VBHC is intended to adopt the patient perspective. As such, CEA is intended to inform coverage decisions at a group or population level and VBHC is intended to be implemented at the level of clinician-patient interactions. Meanwhile, value-based payment has emerged as a visible component of VBHC and is gaining a foothold in the United States in various forms, particularly bundled payments and accountable care organizations, in an effort to reward high-value care and disincentivize low-value care. Differences aside, as the worlds of VBHC and CEA begin to intersect, each discipline can learn from the other.