Understanding Medicare ACO Adoption in the Context of Market Factors.

Medicare Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) have achieved high-quality performance and recent cost savings, but little is known about how local market conditions influence provider adoption. The authors describe physician practice participation in Medicare ACOs at the county level and use adjusted logistic regression to assess the association between ACO presence and 3 characteristics hypothesized to influence ACO formation: physician market concentration, Medicare Advantage (MA) penetration, and commercial health insurance market concentration. Analyses are repeated on urban and rural county subgroups to examine geographic differences in ACO adoption. Practice participation in ACOs grew 19% nationally from 5.4% to 6.4% of practices between 2015 to 2017, but participation lagged in the West and rural counties, the latter of which had relatively concentrated physician markets and low MA penetration. After controlling for urban location, population density, and other covariates, ACO presence in a county was independently associated with less concentrated physician markets and moderate MA penetration but not commercial insurance concentration. The evidence suggests that Medicare ACO programs have continued appeal to physician practices, but additional engagement strategies may be needed to expand adoption in rural areas. In addition, greater practice competition and MA experience may facilitate ACO adoption. These insights into the relationship between market conditions and ACO participation have important implications for policy efforts to accelerate Medicare payment transformation.

Readmissions, Observation, and the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program.

BACKGROUND: The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, which is included in the Affordable Care Act (ACA), applies financial penalties to hospitals that have higher-than-expected readmission rates for targeted conditions. Some policy analysts worry that reductions in readmissions are being achieved by keeping returning patients in observation units instead of formally readmitting them to the hospital. We examined the changes in readmission rates and stays in observation units over time for targeted and nontargeted conditions and assessed whether hospitals that had greater increases in observation-service use had greater reductions in readmissions. METHODS: We compared monthly, hospital-level rates of readmission and observation-service use within 30 days after hospital discharge among Medicare elderly beneficiaries from October 2007 through May 2015. We used an interrupted time-series model to determine when trends changed and whether changes differed between targeted and nontargeted conditions. We assessed the correlation between changes in readmission rates and use of observation services after adoption of the ACA in March 2010. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 3387 hospitals. From 2007 to 2015, readmission rates for targeted conditions declined from 21.5% to 17.8%, and rates for nontargeted conditions declined from 15.3% to 13.1%. Shortly after passage of the ACA, the readmission rate declined quickly, especially for targeted conditions, and then continued to fall at a slower rate after October 2012 for both targeted and nontargeted conditions. Stays in observation units for targeted conditions increased from 2.6% in 2007 to 4.7% in 2015, and rates for nontargeted conditions increased from 2.5% to 4.2%. Within hospitals, there was no significant association between changes in observation-unit stays and readmissions after implementation of the ACA. CONCLUSIONS: Readmission trends are consistent with hospitals' responding to incentives to reduce readmissions, including the financial penalties for readmissions under the ACA. We did not find evidence that changes in observation-unit stays accounted for the decrease in readmissions.

Black patients more likely than whites to undergo surgery at low-quality hospitals in segregated regions.

Research has shown that black patients more frequently undergo surgery at low-quality hospitals than do white patients. We assessed the extent to which living in racially segregated areas and living in geographic proximity to low-quality hospitals contribute to this disparity. Using national Medicare data for all patients who underwent one of three high-risk surgical procedures in 2005-08, we found that black patients actually tended to live closer to higher-quality hospitals than white patients did but were 25-58 percent more likely than whites to receive surgery at low-quality hospitals. Racial segregation was also a factor, with black patients in the most segregrated areas 41-96 percent more likely than white patients to undergo surgery at low-quality hospitals. To address these disparities, care navigators and public reporting of comparative quality could steer patients and their referring physicians to higher-quality hospitals, while quality improvement efforts could focus on improving outcomes for high-risk surgery at hospitals that disproportionately serve black patients. Unfortunately, existing policies such as pay-for-performance, bundled payments, and nonpayment for adverse events may divert resources and exacerbate these disparities.

Containing costs and improving care for children in Medicaid and CHIP.

The current health reform debate is greatly concerned with "bending the curve" of cost growth and containing costs, particularly in public programs. Our research demonstrates that spending in Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is highly concentrated, particularly among children with chronic health problems. Ten percent of enrollees (two-thirds of whom have a chronic condition) account for 72 percent of the spending; 30 percent of enrolled children receive little or no care. These results highlight the importance of cost containment strategies that reduce avoidable hospitalizations among children with chronic problems and policies that increase preventive care, particularly among African American children.

Cost sharing in Medicaid and CHIP: how does it affect out-of-pocket spending?

Rapidly rising spending has prompted debate about increasing cost sharing in Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). In this paper we assess the role of cost sharing in Medicaid and the CHIP and its potential financial burden on low-income families with children. We find that many families would face high health spending burdens even with minimal cost sharing for their publicly insured children. Adding even modest cost sharing for such children could greatly increase high financial burdens. Our results also suggest that implementing income-based caps on family spending can help address the burden of high spending for low-income families.