The Impact Of Telemedicine On Medicare Utilization, Spending, And Quality, 2019-22.

Telemedicine use remains substantially higher than it was before the COVID-19 pandemic, although it has fallen from pandemic highs. To inform the ongoing debate about whether to continue payment for telemedicine visits, we estimated the association of greater telemedicine use across health systems with utilization, spending, and quality. In 2020, Medicare patients receiving care at health systems in the highest quartile of telemedicine use had 2.5 telemedicine visits per person (26.8 percent of visits) compared with 0.7 telemedicine visits per person (9.5 percent of visits) in the lowest quartile of telemedicine use. In 2021-22, relative to those in the lowest quartile, Medicare patients of health systems in the highest quartile had an increase of 0.21 total outpatient visits (telemedicine and in-person) per patient per year (2.2 percent relative increase), a decrease of 14.4 annual non-COVID-19 emergency department visits per 1,000 patients per year (2.7 percent relative decrease), a $248 increase in per patient per year spending (1.6 percent relative increase), and increased adherence for metformin and statins. There were no clear differential changes in hospitalizations or receipt of preventive care.

Diabetes-Focused Health Care Utilization Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the current rates of health services use with various types of providers among adolescents and young adults (AYA) with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and evaluate which patient factors are associated with rates of service use from different provider types. METHODS: Using 2012-16 claims data from a national commercial insurer, we identified 18,927 person-years of AYA with T1D aged 13 to 26 years and evaluated the frequency at which: 1) AYA skipped diabetes care for a year despite being insured; 2) received care from pediatric or non-pediatric generalists or endocrinologists if care was sought; and 3) received annual hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing as recommended for AYA. We used descriptive statistics and multivariable regression to examine patient, insurance, and physician characteristics associated with utilization and quality outcomes. RESULTS: Between ages 13 and 26, the percentage of AYA with: any diabetes-focused visits declined from 95.3% to 90.3%; the mean annual number of diabetes-focused visits, if any, decreased from 3.5 to 3.0; receipt of ≥2 HbA1c tests annually decreased from 82.3% to 60.6%. Endocrinologists were the majority providers of diabetes care across ages, yet the relative proportion of AYA whose diabetes care was endocrinologist-dominated decreased from 67.3% to 52.7% while diabetes care dominated by primary care providers increased from 19.9% to 38.2%. The strongest predictors of diabetes care utilization were younger age and use of diabetes technology (pumps and continuous glucose monitors). CONCLUSIONS: Several provider types are involved in the care of AYA with T1D, though predominate provider type and care quality changes substantially across age in a commercially-insured population.

Changing Health Care Markets Have the Potential to Undermine Stroke Systems of Care.

This Viewpoint discusses the importance of prioritizing quality of care for patients with stroke in a changing health care environment.

Specialist use among privately insured children with disabilities.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate primary care practice ownership and specialist-use patterns for commercially insured children with disabilities. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: A national commercial claims database and the Health Systems and Provider Database from 2012 to 2016 are the data sources for this study. STUDY DESIGN: This cross-sectional, descriptive study examines: (1) the most visited type of pediatric primary care physician and practice (independent or system-owned); (2) pediatric and non-pediatric specialist-use patterns; and (3) how practice ownership relates to specialist-use patterns. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: This study identifies 133,749 person-years of commercially insured children with disabilities aged 0-18 years with at least 24 months of continuous insurance coverage by linking a national commercial claims data set with the Health Systems and Provider Database and applying the validated Children with Disabilities Algorithm. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Three-quarters (75.9%) of children with disabilities received their pediatric primary care in independent practices. Nearly two thirds (59.6%) used at least one specialist with 45.1% using nonpediatric specialists, 28.8% using pediatric ones, and 17.0% using both. Specialist-use patterns varied by both child age and specialist type. Children with disabilities in independent practices were as likely to see a specialist as those in system-owned ones: 57.1% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 56.7%-57.4%) versus 57.3% (95% CI 56.6%-58.0%), respectively (p = 0.635). The percent using two or more types of specialists was 46.1% (95% CI 45.4%-46.7%) in independent practices, comparable to that in systems 47.1% (95% CI 46.2%-48.0%) (p = 0.054). However, the mean number of specialist visits was significantly lower in independent practices than in systems-4.0 (95% CI 3.9%-4.0%) versus 4.4 (95% CI 4.3%-4.6%) respectively-reaching statistical significance with p < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing how privately insured children with disabilities use pediatric primary care from pediatric and nonpediatric primary care specialists through both independent and system-owned practices is important for improving care quality and value.

Organization of Cancer Specialists in US Physician Practices and Health Systems.

PURPOSE: To describe the supply of cancer specialists, the organization of cancer care within versus outside of health systems, and the distance to multispecialty cancer centers. METHODS: Using the 2018 Health Systems and Provider Database from the National Bureau of Economic Research and 2018 Medicare data, we identified 46,341 unique physicians providing cancer care. We stratified physicians by discipline (adult/pediatric medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgical/gynecologic oncologists, other surgeons performing cancer surgeries, or palliative care physicians), system type (National Cancer Institute [NCI] Cancer Center system, non-NCI academic system, nonacademic system, or nonsystem/independent practice), practice size, and composition (single disciplinary oncology, multidisciplinary oncology, or multispecialty). We computed the density of cancer specialists by county and calculated distances to the nearest NCI Cancer Center. RESULTS: More than half of all cancer specialists (57.8%) practiced in health systems, but 55.0% of cancer-related visits occurred in independent practices. Most system-based physicians were in large practices with more than 100 physicians, while those in independent practices were in smaller practices. Practices in NCI Cancer Center systems (95.2%), non-NCI academic systems (95.0%), and nonacademic systems (94.3%) were primarily multispecialty, while fewer independent practices (44.8%) were. Cancer specialist density was sparse in many rural areas, where the median travel distance to an NCI Cancer Center was 98.7 miles. Distances to NCI Cancer Centers were shorter for individuals living in high-income areas than in low-income areas, even for individuals in suburban and urban areas. CONCLUSION: Although many cancer specialists practiced in multispecialty health systems, many also worked in smaller-sized independent practices where most patients were treated. Access to cancer specialists and cancer centers was limited in many areas, particularly in rural and low-income areas.

Hospital Survival In Rural Markets: Closures, Mergers, And Profitability.

Financial distress among rural hospitals in the US has increased in recent years. Using national hospital data, we investigated how the decline in profitability has affected hospital survival, either independently or with a merger. The answer has direct implications for access to care and competition in rural markets. We assessed the rate of hospital closures and mergers in predominantly rural markets during the period 2010-18, focusing on hospitals that were unprofitable at baseline. A minority of unprofitable hospitals (7 percent) closed. A larger share (17 percent) merged, most commonly with organizations from outside of their local geographic market. Most unprofitable hospitals (77 percent) continued to operate through 2018 without closure or merger. About half of these hospitals returned to profitability. At the market level, 22 percent of markets served by unprofitable hospitals lost a competitor to closure or within-market merger. Out-of-market mergers affected 33 percent of markets with an unprofitable hospital. Overall, our results suggest that rural markets are experiencing meaningful rates of hospital closures and mergers, yet many hospitals have survived despite poor financial performance. Policies targeting access to care will continue to be important. Similar attention will be needed to address the competitive effects of hospital closures and mergers on prices and quality.

Organization and Performance of US Health Systems.

Importance: Health systems play a central role in the delivery of health care, but relatively little is known about these organizations and their performance. Objective: To (1) identify and describe health systems in the United States; (2) assess differences between physicians and hospitals in and outside of health systems; and (3) compare quality and cost of care delivered by physicians and hospitals in and outside of health systems. Evidence Review: Health systems were defined as groups of commonly owned or managed entities that included at least 1 general acute care hospital, 10 primary care physicians, and 50 total physicians located within a single hospital referral region. They were identified using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services administrative data, Internal Revenue Service filings, Medicare and commercial claims, and other data. Health systems were categorized as academic, public, large for-profit, large nonprofit, or other private systems. Quality of preventive care, chronic disease management, patient experience, low-value care, mortality, hospital readmissions, and spending were assessed for Medicare beneficiaries attributed to system and nonsystem physicians. Prices for physician and hospital services and total spending were assessed in 2018 commercial claims data. Outcomes were adjusted for patient characteristics and geographic area. Findings: A total of 580 health systems were identified and varied greatly in size. Systems accounted for 40% of physicians and 84% of general acute care hospital beds and delivered primary care to 41% of traditional Medicare beneficiaries. Academic and large nonprofit systems accounted for a majority of system physicians (80%) and system hospital beds (64%). System hospitals were larger than nonsystem hospitals (67% vs 23% with >100 beds), as were system physician practices (74% vs 12% with >100 physicians). Performance on measures of preventive care, clinical quality, and patient experience was modestly higher for health system physicians and hospitals than for nonsystem physicians and hospitals. Prices paid to health system physicians and hospitals were significantly higher than prices paid to nonsystem physicians and hospitals (12%-26% higher for physician services, 31% for hospital services). Adjusting for practice size attenuated health systems differences on quality measures, but price differences for small and medium practices remained large. Conclusions and Relevance: In 2018, health system physicians and hospitals delivered a large portion of medical services. Performance on clinical quality and patient experience measures was marginally better in systems but spending and prices were substantially higher. This was especially true for small practices. Small quality differentials combined with large price differentials suggests that health systems have not, on average, realized their potential for better care at equal or lower cost.

Increases in Inpatient Psychiatry Beds Operated by Systems, For-Profits, and Chains, 2010-2016.

OBJECTIVE: This study explored trends in the quantity of inpatient psychiatry beds and in facility characteristics. METHODS: Using the National Bureau of Economic Research's Health Systems and Provider Database, the authors examined changes in the number of psychiatric facilities and beds, focusing on system ownership, profit status, facility type (general acute care versus freestanding), and affiliation with psychiatric hospital chains from 2010 to 2016. RESULTS: The number of psychiatric beds was relatively unchanged from 2010 (N=112,182 beds) to 2016 (N=111,184). However, the number of beds operated by systems increased by 39.8% (N=15,803); for-profits, by 56.9% (N=8,572); and chains, by 16.7% (N=6,256). Net increases in beds were primarily concentrated in for-profit freestanding psychiatric hospitals. In 2016, most for-profit beds were part of chains (70.2%) and systems (61.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient psychiatry has shifted toward increased ownership by systems, for-profits, and chains. Payers and policy makers should safeguard against profiteering, and future research should investigate the implications of these trends on quality of care.

Public Payment Rates For Hospitals And The Potential For Consolidation-Induced Cost Shifting.

The theory of hospital cost shifting posits that reductions in public prices lead to higher commercial prices. The cost-shifting narrative and the empirical strategies used to evaluate it typically assume no connection between public prices and the number of hospitals operating in the market (market structure). We raise the possibility of "consolidation-induced cost shifting," which recognizes that changes in public prices for hospital care can affect market structure and, through that mechanism, affect commercial prices. We investigated the first leg of that argument: that public payment may affect hospital market structure. After controlling for many confounders, we found that hospitals with a higher share of Medicare patients had lower and more rapidly declining profits and an increased likelihood of closure or acquisition compared with hospitals that were less reliant on Medicare. This is consistent with the existence of consolidation-induced cost shifting and implies that reductions in public prices must be undertaken cautiously. Mechanisms to limit closure- or acquisition-induced increases in commercial hospital prices may be important.

Primary care quality and cost for privately insured patients in and out of US Health Systems: Evidence from four states.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize physician health system membership in four states between 2012 and 2016 and to compare primary care quality and cost between in-system providers and non-system providers for the commercially insured population. DATA SOURCES: Physician membership in health systems was obtained from a unique longitudinal database on health systems and matched at the provider level to 2014 all-payer claims data from Colorado, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Utah. STUDY DESIGN: Using an observational study design, we compared physicians in health systems to non-system physicians located in the same state and geography on average cost of care (risk-adjusted using the Johns Hopkins' Adjusted Clinical Grouper), five HEDIS quality measures, one measure of developmental screening, and two Prevention Quality Indicator Measures. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Patients in commercial health plans were attributed to a primary care physician accounting for the plurality of office visits. A cohort for each quality measure was constructed based on appropriate measure specifications. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The share of physicians in health systems increased steadily from 2012 to 2016 and ranged from 48% in Colorado to 63% in Utah in 2016. Compared to physicians not in a system, system physicians performed similarly on most HEDIS quality metrics compared to non-system physicians. Patients attributed to in-system physicians had about 40% higher rates (P < .05) of Ambulatory Care Sensitive Admissions (measured in admissions per 100 000:921.33 in-system vs 674.61 not-in-system for acute composite; 2540.91 in-system vs 1972.17 for chronic composite In-system providers were associated with $29 (P < .05) higher average per member per month costs (453.37 vs 432.93). Overall, differences in performance by system membership were relatively small compared to differences across states and geography. CONCLUSION: A growing share of physicians is part of a health system from 2012 to 2016. Providers in health systems are not delivering primary care more efficiently than non-system providers for the commercially insured.

Changes in Quality of Care after Hospital Mergers and Acquisitions.

BACKGROUND: The hospital industry has consolidated substantially during the past two decades and at an accelerated pace since 2010. Multiple studies have shown that hospital mergers have led to higher prices for commercially insured patients, but research about effects on quality of care is limited. METHODS: Using Medicare claims and Hospital Compare data from 2007 through 2016 on performance on four measures of quality of care (a composite of clinical-process measures, a composite of patient-experience measures, mortality, and the rate of readmission after discharge) and data on hospital mergers and acquisitions occurring from 2009 through 2013, we conducted difference-in-differences analyses comparing changes in the performance of acquired hospitals from the time before acquisition to the time after acquisition with concurrent changes for control hospitals that did not have a change in ownership. RESULTS: The study sample included 246 acquired hospitals and 1986 control hospitals. Being acquired was associated with a modest differential decline in performance on the patient-experience measure (adjusted differential change, -0.17 SD; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.26 to -0.07; P = 0.002; the change was analogous to a fall from the 50th to the 41st percentile) and no significant differential change in 30-day readmission rates (-0.10 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.53 to 0.34; P = 0.72) or in 30-day mortality (-0.03 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.20 to 0.14; P = 0.72). Acquired hospitals had a significant differential improvement in performance on the clinical-process measure (0.22 SD; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.38; P = 0.03), but this could not be attributed conclusively to a change in ownership because differential improvement occurred before acquisition. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital acquisition by another hospital or hospital system was associated with modestly worse patient experiences and no significant changes in readmission or mortality rates. Effects on process measures of quality were inconclusive. (Funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.).

Concentration of Potentially Preventable Spending Among High-Cost Medicare Subpopulations: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about whether potentially preventable spending is concentrated among a subset of high-cost Medicare beneficiaries. OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of total spending that is potentially preventable across distinct subpopulations of high-cost Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN: Beneficiaries in the highest 10% of total standardized individual spending were defined as "high-cost" patients, using a 20% sample of Medicare fee-for-service claims from 2012. The following 6 subpopulations were defined using a claims-based algorithm: nonelderly disabled, frail elderly, major complex chronic, minor complex chronic, simple chronic, and relatively healthy. Potentially preventable spending was calculated by summing costs for avoidable emergency department visits using the Billings algorithm plus inpatient and associated 30-day postacute costs for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (ACSCs). The amount and proportion of potentially preventable spending were then compared across the high-cost subpopulations and by individual ACSCs. SETTING: Medicare. PARTICIPANTS: 6 112 450 Medicare beneficiaries. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of spending deemed potentially preventable. RESULTS: In 2012, 4.8% of Medicare spending was potentially preventable, of which 73.8% was incurred by high-cost patients. Despite making up only 4% of the Medicare population, high-cost frail elderly persons accounted for 43.9% of total potentially preventable spending ($6593 per person). High-cost nonelderly disabled persons accounted for 14.8% of potentially preventable spending ($3421 per person) and the major complex chronic group for 11.2% ($3327 per person). Frail elderly persons accounted for most spending related to admissions for urinary tract infections, dehydration, heart failure, and bacterial pneumonia. LIMITATION: Potential misclassification in the identification of preventable spending and lack of detailed clinical data in administrative claims. CONCLUSION: Potentially preventable spending varied across Medicare subpopulations, with the majority concentrated among frail elderly persons. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Commonwealth Fund.

Concentration of high-cost patients in hospitals and markets.

OBJECTIVES: Although we know that healthcare costs are concentrated among a small number of patients, we know much less about the concentration of these costs among providers or markets. This is important because it could help us to understand why some patients are higher-cost compared with others and enable us to develop interventions to reduce costs for these patients. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study. METHODS: We used a 20% sample of Medicare fee-for-service claims data from 2011 and 2012, and defined high-cost patients as those in the top 10% of standardized costs. We then characterized high-concentration hospitals as those with the highest proportion of high-cost patient claims, and high-concentration markets as the Hospital Referral Regions (HRRs) with the highest proportion of high-cost patients. We compared the characteristics and outcomes of each. RESULTS: High-concentration hospitals had 69% of their inpatient Medicare claims from high-cost Medicare beneficiaries compared with 51% for the remaining 90% of hospitals. These hospitals were more likely to be for-profit and major teaching hospitals, located in urban settings, and have higher readmission rates. High-concentration HRRs had 13% high-cost patients compared with 9.5% for the remaining 90% of HRRs. These HRRs had a smaller supply of total physicians, a greater supply of cardiologists, higher rates of emergency department visits, and significantly higher expenditures on care in the last 6 months of life. CONCLUSIONS: High-cost beneficiaries are only modestly concentrated in specific hospitals and healthcare markets.

Segmenting high-cost Medicare patients into potentially actionable cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Providers are assuming growing responsibility for healthcare spending, and prior studies have shown that spending is concentrated in a small proportion of patients. Using simple methods to segment these patients into clinically meaningful subgroups may be a useful and accessible strategy for targeting interventions to control costs. METHODS: Using Medicare fee-for-service claims from 2011 (baseline year, used to determine comorbidities and subgroups) and 2012 (spending year), we used basic demographics and comorbidities to group beneficiaries into 6 cohorts, defined by expert opinion and consultation: under-65 disabled/ESRD, frail elderly, major complex chronic, minor complex chronic, simple chronic, and relatively healthy. We considered patients in the highest 10% of spending to be "high-cost." RESULTS: 611,245 beneficiaries were high-cost; these patients were less often white (76.2% versus 80.9%) and more often dually-eligible (37.0% versus 18.3%). By segment, frail patients were the most likely (46.2%) to be high-cost followed by the under-65 (14.3%) and major complex chronic groups (11.1%); fewer than 5% of the beneficiaries in the other cohorts were high-cost in the spending year. The frail elderly ($70,196) and under-65 disabled/ESRD ($71,210) high-cost groups had the highest spending; spending in the frail high-cost group was driven by inpatient ($23,704) and post-acute care ($24,080), while the under 65-disabled/ESRD spent more through part D costs ($23,003). CONCLUSIONS: Simple criteria can segment Medicare beneficiaries into clinically meaningful subgroups with different spending profiles. IMPLICATIONS: Under delivery system reform, interventions that focus on frail or disabled patients may have particularly high value as providers seek to reduce spending. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Putting smart money to work for quality improvement.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of paying physicians for performance on quality measures of diabetes care when combined with other care management tools. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: In 2001, a managed care organization in upstate New York designed and implemented a pilot program to financially reward doctors for the quality of care delivered to diabetic patients. In addition to paying a performance bonus, physicians were also supplied with a diabetic registry and met in groups to discuss progress in meeting goals for diabetic care. Primary data on diabetes care at the patient level were collected from each physician during the 8-month period, April 2001-January 2002. STUDY DESIGN: Physicians were scored on individual process and outcome measures of diabetes care on three separate occasions; these individual scores were combined into a composite score on which the financial reward was allocated. The study design is pre/post for the patients whose physicians participated in the performance pay program. The control group is a large sample of the health plan's diabetic members. DATA COLLECTION: Data on patient outcomes were self-reported by physicians participating in the study. These data were audited with spot checks of medical charts. Data for the control group were collected as part of the health plan's annual HEDIS data collection. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Physicians and patients achieved significant improvement on five out of six process measures, and on two out of three outcome measures (HbA1c control and LDL control). Thirteen out of 21 physicians improved their average composite score enough to earn some level of financial reward. Of the eight physicians not receiving any of the three levels of reward, six improved their composite scores. CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives for physicians, bundled with other care management tools, led to improvement on objectively measured quality of care for diabetic patients. Self-selection by physicians into the pay pilot and the small sample size of participating physicians limit the generalizability of the results.

An economic analysis of health plan conversions: are they in the public interest?

Over the last decade, managed-care companies have been consolidating on both a regional and national scale. More recently, nonprofit health plans have been converting to for-profit status, and this conversion has frequently occurred as a step to facilitate merger or acquisition with a for-profit company. Some industry observers attribute these managed-care marketplace trends to an industry shakeout resulting from increased competition in the sector. At the same time, these perceived competitive pressures have led to questions about the long-run viability of nonprofit health plans. Furthermore, some industry and government leaders believe that some nonprofits are already conducting themselves like for-profit health plans and question the state premium tax exemption ordinarily accorded to such plans. This paper examines related health policy issues through the lens of a case study of the proposed conversion of the CareFirst Blue Cross Blue Shield company to a for-profit public-stock company and its merger with the Wellpoint Corporation. Company executives and board members argued that CareFirst lacked access to sufficient capital and faced serious threats to its viability as a financially healthy nonprofit health care company. They also argued that CareFirst and its beneficiaries would benefit from merger through enhanced economies of scale and product-line extensions. Critics of the proposed conversion and merger raised concerns about the adverse impacts on access to care, coverage availability, quality of care, safety-net providers, and the cost of health insurance. Analyses demonstrate that CareFirst wields substantial market power in its local market, that it is unlikely to realize cost savings through expanded economies of scale, and that access to capital concerns are largely driven by the perceived need for further expansion through merger and acquisition. Although it is impossible to predict future changes in quality of care for CareFirst, analyses suggest that quality appears to be somewhat lower in for-profit national managed-care companies. Additional research is needed to assess the viability of true nonprofits, the potential effects of nonprofits and for-profit national managed-care plans on the evolution of local insurance and provider markets, and methods for effective oversight of nonprofit health plans.

A phase II study of topotecan and cyclophosphamide with G-CSF in patients with advanced small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: We conducted a multicenter phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of topotecan and cyclophosphamide for patients with advanced small cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were eligible if they had newly diagnosed extensive stage SCLC or if they had SCLC that progressed more than three months after completion of the first chemotherapy regimen. Patients were treated every 21 days with cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 IV on day 1 and topotecan 1.0 mg/m2 on days 1 to 5. Filgrastim was administered for 10 days starting on day 6. Patients were evaluated for objective tumor response, time to tumor progression, overall survival and toxicity. RESULTS: Forty-two eligible patients were treated. Seventeen patients (40.5%) had an objective response including 4 (9.5%) complete remissions (CR). Fifteen patients (35.7%) had stable disease. There are 2 patients known to be alive at the time of this report: one with stable disease at 26 months and another with a CR at 37 months. The median number of cycles completed was 6 (range 1-12). The major toxicities were grades 3 and 4 neutropenia (73.8%), grades 3 and 4 anemia (35.7%) and grades 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia (50%). Five patients died during the first cycle of chemotherapy. The median time to progression was 3 months (range 5 days-36 months) (CI: 51-135 days) and the median overall survival was 9 months (5 days-37 months) (CI: 210-330 days). The two-year survival rate was 21%. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of topotecan and cyclophosphamide is highly active in small cell lung cancer. Myelosuppression is the major toxicity and is rapidly reversible in most patients. The incidence of treatment-related mortality was comparable to some other intensive chemotherapy regimens. This incidence is unacceptably high and indicates better selection criteria are needed in order to exclude patients at excessive risk of morbidity.

National Committee on Quality Assurance health-plan accreditation: predictors, correlates of performance, and market impact.

CONTEXT: Accreditation of health care organizations has traditionally been considered a building block of quality assurance. However, the differences between accredited and nonaccredited health plans and the impact of accreditation on plan enrollment are not well understood. OBJECTIVES: To determine the characteristics of plans that have submitted to accreditation review, the performance of accredited plans on quality indicators and the impact of accreditation on enrollment. DESIGN: The databases containing 1996 data on health plans' National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) accreditation status, organizational characteristics, Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) scores, and patient-reported quality and satisfaction scores were linked to compare accredited health plans to nonaccredited plans. We also combined longitudinal data sets (1993-1998) on accreditation and health plan enrollment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean performance of accredited and nonaccredited plans on HEDIS measures and patient-reported measures of quality; health plan enrollment changes. RESULTS: Accredited plans have higher HEDIS scores but similar or lower performance on patient-reported measures of health plan quality and satisfaction. Furthermore, a substantial number of the plans in the bottom decile of quality performance were accredited suggesting that accreditation does not ensure high quality care. Receipt of accreditation has been associated with increased enrollment in the early years of the accreditation program; however, plans denied NCQA accreditation do not appear to suffer enrollment losses. CONCLUSION: NCQA accreditation is positively associated with some measures of quality but does not assure a minimal level of performance. Efforts now underway to incorporate plan performance on HEDIS into criteria for accreditation seem warranted.