Outpatient Care Among Users and Nonusers of Direct-to-Patient Telehealth: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Expansion of telehealth insurance coverage is hampered by concerns that such coverage may encourage excessive use and spending. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to examine whether users of telehealth services rely more on other forms of outpatient care than nonusers, and to estimate the differences in payment rates. METHODS: We examined claims data from a large national insurer in 2017. We limited our analysis to patients with visits for 3 common diagnoses (N=660,546). We calculated the total number of visits per patient, overall, and by setting, and adjusted for patient- and county-level factors. RESULTS: After multivariable adjustment, telehealth-visit users, compared to nonusers, had 0.44 fewer visits to primary care, 0.11 fewer visits to emergency departments, and 0.17 fewer visits to retail and urgent care. All estimates are statistically significant at P<.001. Average payment rates for telehealth visits were lower than all other settings. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that telehealth visits may substitute rather than add to in-person care for some types of care. Our study suggests that telehealth visits may offer an efficient and less costly alternative.

Care Experiences of Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions in a Payer-Based Patient-Centered Medical Home.

Individuals with multiple chronic health conditions require additional support and medical services, incur higher health care costs, and often have a higher risk of hospitalization. The goal of this study was to examine care experiences of patients with multiple chronic conditions in the CareFirst patient-centered medical home (PCMH). The study used a repeated cross-sectional research design and included 1308 adult CareFirst plan members with multiple chronic conditions. Patient care experiences were collected using a structured telephone survey in 2015 and 2017. Composite scores and individual question responses for patient-provider communication, coordination of care, access to care, and self-management support were analyzed to determine differences between survey years. Overall, patients reported positive care experiences with communication, self-management support, and care coordination. Access to care indicators received lower composite scores. Between 2015 and 2017, patients reported higher ratings for appointment reminders, communicating test results, providers listening carefully, and care plan effectiveness. Patients who completed their CareFirst PCMH care plan had higher care experience scores than patients who did not. A key finding of this study is that care plan completion is associated with positive care experiences, indicating the importance of the care plan to this PCMH model. Lower scores on access to care measures suggest a need for improved pathways for patients to obtain care during nontraditional office hours. Payer-based PCMH models that include enhanced care coordination and additional provider payments to support these activities may be beneficial to patients with multiple chronic conditions.

The CareFirst Patient-Centered Medical Home Program: Cost and Utilization Effects in Its First Three Years.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced primary care models have diffused slowly and shown uneven results. Because their structural features are costly and challenging for small practices to implement, they offer modest rewards for improved performance, and improvement takes time. OBJECTIVE: To test whether a patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model that significantly rewarded cost savings and accommodated small primary care practices was associated with lower spending, fewer hospital admissions, and fewer emergency room visits. DESIGN: We compared medical care expenditures and utilization among adults who participated in the PCMH program to adults who did not participate. We computed difference-in-difference estimates using two-part multivariate generalized linear models for expenditures and negative binomial models for utilization. Control variables included patient demographics, county, chronic condition indicators, and illness severity. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1,433,297 adults aged 18-64 years, residing in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia, and insured by CareFirst for at least 3 consecutive months between 2010 and 2013. INTERVENTION: CareFirst implemented enhanced fee-for-service payments to the practices, offered a large retrospective bonus if annual cost and quality targets were exceeded, and provided information and care coordination support. MEASURES: Outcomes were quarterly claims expenditures per member for all covered services, inpatient care, emergency care, and prescription drugs, and quarterly inpatient admissions and emergency room visits. RESULTS: By the third intervention year, annual adjusted total claims payments were $109 per participating member (95 % CI: -$192, -$27), or 2.8 % lower than before the program and compared to those who did not participate. Forty-two percent of the overall decline in spending was explained by lower inpatient care, emergency care, and prescription drug spending. Much of the reduction in inpatient and emergency spending was explained by lower utilization of services. CONCLUSIONS: A PCMH model that does not require practices to make infrastructure investments and that rewards cost savings can reduce spending and utilization.