Surgeon Participation in Early Accountable Care Organizations.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize the landscape of surgeon participation in early accountable care organizations (ACOs) and to identify specialty-, organization-, and market-specific factors associated with ACO participation. BACKGROUND: Despite rapid deployment of alternative payment models (APMs), little is known about the prevalence of surgeon participation, and key drivers behind surgeon participation in APMs. METHODS: Using data from SK&A, a research firm, we evaluated the near universe of US practices to characterize ACO participation among 125,425 US surgeons in 2015. We fit multivariable logistic regression models to characterize key drivers of ACO participation, and more specifically, the interaction between ACO affiliation and organizational structure. RESULTS: Of 125,425 US surgeons, 27,956 (22.3%) participated in at least 1 ACO program in 2015. We observed heterogeneity in participation by subspecialty, with trauma and transplant reporting the highest rate of ACO enrollment (36% for both) and plastic surgeons reporting the lowest (12.9%) followed by ophthalmology (16.0%) and hand (18.6%). Surgeons in group practices and integrated systems were more likely to participate relative to those practicing independently (aOR 1.57, 95% CI 1.50, 1.64; aOR 4.87, 95% CI 4.68, 5.07, respectively). We observed a statistically significant interaction (P <0.001) between surgical specialty and practice organization. Model-derived predicted probabilities revealed that, within each specialty, surgeons in integrated health systems had the highest predicted probabilities of ACO and those practicing independently generally had the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: We observed considerable variation in ACO enrollment among US surgeons, mediated at least in part by differences in practice organization. These data underscore the need for development of frameworks to characterize the strategic advantages and disadvantages associated with APM participation.

The Growing Integration of Physician Practices: With a Medicaid Side Effect.

BACKGROUND: Strategic alignment and integration is currently in vogue throughout the health care industry, but its diffusion and pace have not been documented in recent years. The full range of downstream implications from greater alignment between hospitals and physicians has also not been completely explored. OBJECTIVES: We track the organizational landscape among all office-based US physician practices from 2009 to 2015 and document the degree of vertical integration over time. Then, we examine the implications of vertical integration on practices' acceptance of publicly insured patients. RESEARCH DESIGN: We use descriptive trends and linear regression models with practice level fixed effects to capture the relationships between within-office changes in integration behavior and changes in public payer acceptance. RESULTS: Independent (nonintegrated) physician practices are still the most common organizational type, but their share is declining as the share of practices integrated with a health system increases 3-fold between 2009 and 2015. Although >80% of practices that are part of a health system accept Medicaid, <60% of independent practices will see these patients. Vertically integrating with a health system makes it more likely a practice will start seeing Medicaid patients. CONCLUSIONS: Integration-and possibly consolidation-appears to be occurring and may be increasing over time in the United States. However, it also seems to increase the number of physician practices participating in the Medicaid program. This beneficial side effect has not been previously documented and should be kept in mind as policymakers weigh the pros and cons of a more integrated health care system.

Rewarding healthy food choices in SNAP: behavioral economic applications.

CONTEXT: American obesity rates continue to escalate, but an effective policy response remains elusive. Specific changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) have been proposed as one way to improve nutrition and combat obesity among lower-income populations. While current SNAP proposals hold promise, some important challenges still remain. METHODS: We discuss the four most common recommendations for changes to SNAP and their benefits and limitations. We then propose three new delivery options for SNAP that take advantage of behavioral economic insights and encourage the selection of healthy foods. FINDINGS: Although the existing proposals could help SNAP recipients, they often do not address some important behavioral impediments to buying healthy foods. We believe that behavioral economics can be used to design alternative policies with several advantages, although we recognize and discuss some of their limitations. The first proposal rewards healthy purchases with more SNAP funds and provides an additional incentive to maintain healthier shopping patterns. The second proposal uses the opportunity to win prizes to reward healthy food choices, and the prizes further support healthier habits. The final proposal simplifies healthy food purchases by allowing individuals to commit their SNAP benefits to more nutritious selections in advance. CONCLUSIONS: Reforming the delivery structure of SNAP's benefits could help improve nutrition, weight, and overall health of lower-income individuals. We advocate for more and diverse SNAP proposals, which should be tested and, possibly, combined. Their implementation, however, would require political will, administrative capacity, and funding.