Telehealth as a Tool to Transform Pediatric Care: Views from Stakeholders.

Background and Objectives: The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic generated rapid telehealth expansion. Most prior telehealth studies focus on a single program or health condition, leaving a knowledge gap regarding the most appropriate and effective means of allocating telehealth services and funding. This research seeks to evaluate a wide range of perspectives to inform pediatric telehealth policy and practice. Methods: In 2017, the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Innovation Center) issued a Request for Information to inform the Integrated Care for Kids model. Researchers identified 55 of 186 responses that addressed telehealth and analyzed them based on grounded theory principles overlaid with a constructivist approach to contextualize Medicaid policies, respondent characteristics, and implications for specific populations. Results: Respondents noted several health equity issues that telehealth could help to remedy, including timely care access, specialist shortages, transportation and distance barriers, provider-to-provider communication, and patient and family engagement. Implementation barriers reported by commenters included reimbursement restrictions, licensure issues, and costs of initial infrastructure. Respondents raised savings, care integration, accountability, and increased access to care as potential benefits. Discussion and Conclusions: The pandemic demonstrated that the health system can implement telehealth rapidly, although telehealth cannot be used to provide every aspect of pediatric care such as vaccinations. Respondents highlighted the promise of telehealth, which is heightened if telehealth supports health care transformation rather than replicating how in-office care is currently provided. Telehealth also offers the potential to increase health equity for some populations of pediatric patients.

Limits of prenatal care coordination for improving birth outcomes among Medicaid participants.

Maternity Care Homes (MCHs) intend to address clinical and psychosocial needs for perinatal patients and are commonly implemented for Medicaid beneficiaries. Rigorous evidence supporting MCHs' effectiveness for improving birth outcomes is thin, but most studies consider only clinical and demographic factors from administrative data. To assess birth outcomes with controls for psychosocial variables known to affect them, this paper considers quantitative participant-level data from the Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns prenatal care initiative, with qualitative case study data to further contextualize results. From 2013 to 2017, Strong Start served over 45,000 Medicaid beneficiaries in 32 states, D.C., and Puerto Rico though MCHs, group prenatal care, or freestanding birth centers. Participant data included risks screens for food insecurity, depression, anxiety, pregnancy intention, and intimate partner violence, in addition to clinical and demographic information. After clinical, demographic and psychosocial risks were controlled in a regression model, Strong Start birth center participants showed significantly lower rates of preterm birth, low birthweight, and cesarean section relative to MCH participants (p < .01). In group prenatal care, White participants showed lower rates of preterm birth (p < .01) and Black participants showed lower rates of low birthweight (p < .05) relative to MCH participants. Strong Start participants reported appreciation for MCH care managers' support, but community and clinical referrals often had long waiting lists or were inaccessible. Transformative care models focusing on provider continuity, relationship building, and patient activation may offer more promise for improving birth outcomes than supplementing medical models with care management and other resources.

Intensive Approaches to Prenatal Care May Reduce Risk of Gestational Diabetes.

Objectives: To observe gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) prevalence among participants receiving enhanced prenatal care through one of three care models: Birth Centers, Group Prenatal Care, and Maternity Care Homes. Materials and Methods: This study draws upon data collected from 2014 to 2017 as part of the Strong Start II evaluation and includes data from nearly 46,000 women enrolled across 27 awardees with more than 200 sites throughout the United States. Descriptive and statistical analyses utilized data from participant surveys completed upon entry to the program and a limited chart review. Results: A total of 6.3% of Strong Start participants developed GDM during their pregnancy. Rates varied significantly and substantially by model. After adjusting for participant risk factors, we find that Birth Center participants of all races and ethnicities experienced significantly lower rates of GDM than women of the same race/ethnicity in Maternity Care Homes. Conclusions: The lower rates of gestational diabetes among women receiving Birth Center prenatal care suggest the need for further investigation of how prenatal care approaches can reduce GDM and address health disparities.

Midwifery and Birth Centers Under State Medicaid Programs: Current Limits to Beneficiary Access to a High-Value Model of Care.

Policy Points Birth center services must be covered under Medicaid per federal mandate, but reimbursement and other policy barriers prevent birth centers from serving more Medicaid patients. Midwifery care provided through birth centers improves maternal and infant outcomes and lowers costs for Medicaid beneficiaries. Birth centers offer an array of birth options and have resources to care for patients with medical and psychosocial risks. Addressing the barriers identified in this study would promote birth centers' participation in Medicaid, leading to better outcomes for Medicaid-covered mothers and newborns and significant savings for the Medicaid program. CONTEXT: Midwifery care, particularly when offered through birth centers, has shown promise in both improving pregnancy outcomes and containing costs. The national evaluation of Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns II, an initiative that tested enhanced prenatal care models for Medicaid beneficiaries, found that women receiving prenatal care at Strong Start birth centers experienced superior birth outcomes compared to matched and adjusted counterparts in typical Medicaid care. We use qualitative evaluation data to investigate birth centers' experiences participating in Medicaid, and identify policies that influence Medicaid beneficiaries' access to midwives and birth centers. METHODS: We analyzed data from more than 200 key informant interviews and 40 focus groups conducted during four case study rounds; a phone-based survey of Medicaid officials in Strong Start states; and an Internet-based survey of birth center sites. We identified themes related to access to midwives and birth centers, focusing on influential Medicaid policies. FINDINGS: Medicaid beneficiaries chose birth center care because they preferred midwife providers, wanted a more natural birth experience, or in some cases sought certain pain relief methods or birth procedures not available at hospitals. However, Medicaid enrollees currently have less access to birth centers than privately insured women. Many birth centers have difficulty contracting with managed care organizations and participating in Medicaid value-based delivery system reforms, and birth center reimbursement rates are sometimes too low to cover the actual cost of care. Some birth centers significantly limit Medicaid business because of low reimbursement rates and threats to facility sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid beneficiaries do not have the same access to maternity care providers and birth settings as their privately insured counterparts. Medicaid policy barriers prevent some birth centers from serving more Medicaid patients, or threaten the financial sustainability of centers. By addressing these barriers, more Medicaid beneficiaries could access care that is associated with positive birth outcomes for mothers and newborns, and the Medicaid program could reap significant savings.

Improving Birth Outcomes And Lowering Costs For Women On Medicaid: Impacts Of 'Strong Start For Mothers And Newborns'.

The federal Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns initiative supported alternative approaches to prenatal care, enhancing service delivery through the use of birth centers, group prenatal care, and maternity care homes. Using propensity score reweighting to control for medical and social risks, we evaluated the impacts of Strong Start's models on birth outcomes and costs by comparing the experiences of Strong Start enrollees to those of Medicaid-covered women who received typical prenatal care. We found that women who received prenatal care in birth centers had lower rates of preterm and low-birthweight infants, lower rates of cesarean section, and higher rates of vaginal birth after cesarean than did the women in the comparison groups. Improved outcomes were achieved at lower costs. There were few improvements in outcomes for participants who received group prenatal care, although their costs were lower in the prenatal period, and no improvements in outcomes for participants in maternity care homes.

Prenatal Depression: Assessment and Outcomes among Medicaid Participants.

This study used bivariate and regression-adjusted analyses of participant-level survey and medical data to investigate prevalence of depression among pregnant Medicaid participants, correlates of depression, and the relationship between depression and pregnancy outcomes. The sample included Medicaid participants with a single gestation and valid depression data who were enrolled in Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns 2, a national preterm birth prevention program, from 2013 to 2017 (N = 37,287; 85% of total enrollment). Depression rates in Strong Start were high (27.5%). Depression was associated with being black; having other children, an unplanned pregnancy, or challenges accessing prenatal care; not having a co-resident spouse or partner; and experiencing intimate partner violence. After these and other risk factors were controlled for, depression remained associated with higher rates of preterm birth. Systematic screening and holistic approaches to prenatal care that address depression and associated risks could help reduce rates of preterm birth and other poor pregnancy outcomes.

Twin Births in Medicaid: Prevalence, Outcomes, Utilization, and Cost in Four States, 2014-2015.

OBJECTIVES: Twin births have increased in prevalence. Twin births are more likely to have poorer outcomes than singleton births and are more costly. However, although Medicaid paid for approximately half of U.S. births in 2016, little is known specifically about the incidence of twin births and related costs for Medicaid beneficiaries. This paper seeks to expand the knowledge of twin births covered by Medicaid. METHODS: We obtained data for singleton (N = 115,568) and twin (N = 3775) Medicaid-covered births in selected geographic areas of four states in 2014 and 2015. States provided linked birth certificates to Medicaid claims data for mothers and infants. We compared health care utilization and Medicaid costs for twins to singletons in the same geographic areas. RESULTS: The prevalence of Medicaid twins in the selected areas of these four states was 3.2% of births, identical to the rate of twins nationwide. Two thirds of Medicaid twins were born preterm, and average gestational age was 34.8 weeks. Mothers of twins had higher rates of C-Sect. (73.6% vs. 32.0% for singletons) and of neonatal intensive care use (45.2% vs. 11.1%). The average length of delivery stay for twins was 12.3 days, vs. 4.1, and the rate of hospital readmissions was almost twice as high. The total cost for mother and infant over the prenatal, delivery, and post-natal period for a pair of twins was $48,479, over two and a half times as high as for singleton births ($18,032). However, when considering the average cost of a single twin vs. a singleton birth, the cost differential is less ($24,239 vs. $18,032, or a ratio of 1.34). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid twins are a fragile population with poorer outcomes and higher service use than singleton infants. Twins contribute substantially to the Medicaid cost of maternity and newborn care. A variety of strategies can be used to improve twin outcomes and reduce costs.

Preeclampsia Risk and Prevention among Pregnant Medicaid Beneficiaries.

Pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders can cause morbidity and mortality. Low-dose aspirin (LDA) reduces risk. This paper aims to assess Medicaid beneficiaries' risk factors for preeclampsia and their providers' clinical use of LDA in the federal Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns II initiative. Twenty-seven awardees with more than 200 care sites served almost 46,000 women. This mixed-methods analysis assesses rates of risks, incidence of pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders, and assessment of care teams' LDA knowledge and reported prescription practices. Many Strong Start participants had risk factors that merited LDA, but most practices reported inconsistent or non-existent prescribing. Use varied within the three care models and among all provider types. Ancillary care team members often had no knowledge of LDA's benefits, resulting in lost opportunities for educating patients and assessing adherence to LDA use. Clear policies and well-integrated care teams could increase evidence-based use, improve pregnancy outcomes, and promote women's lifelong cardiovascular health.

Barriers and facilitators to depression screening in older adults: a qualitative study.

Objectives: The objective of this qualitative study was to better understand facilitators and barriers to depression screening for older adults.Methods: We conducted 43 focus groups with 102 providers and 247 beneficiaries or proxies: 13 focus groups with Medicare providers, 28 with older Medicare beneficiaries, and 2 with caregivers of older Medicare beneficiaries. Each focus group was recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using principles of grounded theory.Results: There was widespread consensus among beneficiary and provider focus group participants that depression screening was important. However, several barriers interfered with effective depression screening, including stigma, lack of resources for treatment referrals, and lack of time during medical encounters. Positive communication with providers and an established relationship with a trusted provider were primary facilitators for depression screening. Providers who took the time to put their beneficiaries at ease and used conversational language rather than clinical terms appeared to have the most success in eliciting beneficiary honesty about depressive symptoms. Respondents stressed the need for providers to be attentive, concerned, non-judgmental, and respectful.Conclusion: Findings indicate that using person-centered approaches to build positive communication and trust between beneficiaries and providers could be an effective strategy for improving depression screening. Better screening can lead to higher rates of diagnosis and treatment of depression that could enhance quality of life for older adults.

Key Considerations for Implementing Group Prenatal Care: Lessons from 60 Practices.

INTRODUCTION: Group prenatal care combines clinical care with peer support and education. Research has indicated neutral or positive results for group care when compared with traditional individual prenatal visits. A national initiative, Strong Start II, was implemented to determine if specific prenatal care interventions such as group prenatal care can reduce the rate of preterm birth, improve health outcomes, and lower costs. This study explored barriers to implementation and sustainability and strategies for overcoming barriers and sustaining the model. METHODS: Results from prenatal care provider-level qualitative case studies for the independent evaluation of Strong Start were examined. Case studies for sites implementing group prenatal care were based on a total of 313 interviews with 441 Strong Start key informants (eg, prenatal care providers, project staff, and health administrators involved in group care) and 53 focus groups with 428 Strong Start participants from 2013 to 2016. Supplemental interviews with 25 additional stakeholders were also conducted. Case study data were queried using content analysis followed by a grounded theory-based analysis of these findings. RESULTS: Barriers to implementation existed at patient, provider, administrator, system, and funding levels and included inflexible appointment times, lack of childcare, lack of appropriate meeting space, new scheduling and training needs, meeting requirements of graduate medical education programs, prenatal care provider and administrator reluctance to adopt new practices, and Medicaid payment policies. Sites newly implementing group prenatal care had varying degrees of success sustaining their programs. Both new and established sites identified provider champions and opt-out enrollment approaches as critical for maintaining buy-in. DISCUSSION: Successful implementation of group prenatal care depends on systematic strategies at the practice, payer, provider, patient, and policy levels to implement, reimburse for, and sustain the model. Strategies for overcoming barriers can assist practices in offering this transformative approach, including practices with graduate medical education programs or those serving women with clinical, demographic, or psychosocial risk factors for preterm birth.

Strategies to Promote Postpartum Visit Attendance Among Medicaid Participants.

Background: Postpartum care is important for promoting maternal and infant health and well-being. Nationally, less than 60% of Medicaid-enrolled women attend their postpartum visit. The Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns II Initiative, an enhanced prenatal care program, intended to improve birth outcomes among Medicaid beneficiaries, enrolled 45,599 women, and included a variety of approaches to increasing engagement in postpartum care. Methods: This study analyzes qualitative case studies that include coded notes from 739 interviews with 1,074 key informants and 133 focus groups with 951 women; 4 years of annual memos capturing activities by each of 27 awardees and 24 Birth Center sites; and a review of interview and survey data from Medicaid officials in 20 states. Results: Strong Start prenatal care included education and support regarding postpartum care and concerns. Key informants identified Strong Start services and other strategies they perceived as increasing access to postpartum care, including provider and/or care coordinator continuity across prenatal, delivery, and postpartum visits; efforts to address information gaps and link women to appropriate resources; enhancing services to meet needs such as treatment for depression; addressing barriers related to transportation and childcare; and aligning incentives to encourage prioritization of postpartum care among patients and providers. They also identified ongoing barriers to postpartum visit attendance. Conclusions: Postpartum care is essential to maternal and infant health. Medicaid enrolls many high-risk women and is the largest payer for postpartum care. Using lessons from Strong Start, providers who serve Medicaid-enrolled women can advance strategies to improve postpartum visit access and attendance.

What do women in Medicaid say about enhanced prenatal care? Findings from the national Strong Start evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid pays for approximately half of United States births, yet little research has explored Medicaid beneficiaries' perspectives on their maternity care. Typical maternity care in the United States has been criticized as too medically focused while insufficiently addressing psychosocial risks and patient education. Enhanced care strives for a more holistic approach. METHODS: The perspectives of participants in the Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns II initiative, which provided enhanced prenatal care to women covered by Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) during pregnancy through Birth Centers, Group Prenatal Care, and Maternity Care Homes, are evaluated. Strong Start intended to improve care quality and birth outcomes while lowering costs. We analyzed data from 133 focus groups with 951 pregnant or postpartum women who participated in Strong Start from 2013 to 2017. RESULTS: The majority of focus group participants said that Strong Start's enhanced care offered numerous important benefits over typical maternity care, including considerably more focus on women's psychosocial risk factors and need for education. They praised increased support; nutrition, breastfeeding, and family planning education; community referrals; longer time with practitioners; and involvement of partners in their care. Maternity Care Home participants, however, occasionally voiced concerns over lack of practitioner continuity and short clinical appointments, whereas Group Prenatal Care participants sometimes said they could not attend visits because of lack of childcare. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries reported positive experiences with Strong Start care. If more Medicaid practitioners could adopt aspects of the prenatal care approaches that women praised most, it is likely that women's risk factors could be more effectively addressed and their overall care experiences could be improved.

Pregnant women with opioid use disorder and their infants in three state Medicaid programs in 2013-2016.

BACKGROUND: Maternal opioid use disorder (OUD) has serious consequences for maternal and infant health. Analysis of Medicaid enrollee data is critical, since Medicaid bears a disproportionate share of costs. METHODS: This study analyzes linked maternal and infant Medicaid claims data and infant birth records in three states in the year before and after a delivery in 2014-2015 (2013-2016) examining health, health care use, treatment, and neonatal outcomes. Diagnosis and procedure codes identify OUD and other substance use disorders (SUDs). RESULTS: In the year before and after delivery, 2.2 percent of the sample had an OUD diagnosis, and 5.9 percent had a SUD diagnosis other than OUD. Of the women with OUD, 72.8% had treatment for a SUD in the year before and after delivery, but most had none in an average enrolled month, and only 8.8% received any methadone treatment in a given month. Pregnant women with OUD had delayed and lower rates of prenatal care compared to women with other substance use disorders (SUDs). Infants of mothers with OUD did not differ from infants of mothers with other SUDs in rate of preterm or low birth weight but had higher NICU admission rates and longer birth hospitalizations. Health care costs for women with an OUD were higher than those with other SUDs. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need for comprehensive, evidence-based OUD treatment integrated with maternity care. To fill critical gaps in care, workforce and infrastructure innovations can facilitate delivery of preventive and treatment services coordinated across settings.

Facilitators and barriers to optimal preventive service use among providers and older patients.

Preventive service use remains low among Medicare beneficiaries despite the Affordable Care Act's waiver of coinsurance. This study sought to understand barriers and facilitators to preventive service provision, access, and uptake. We used a mixed methods approach synthesizing quantitative survey and qualitative focus group data. Self-reported utilization of and factors related to preventive services were explored using quantitative data from the 2012 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. Qualitative data from 16 focus groups conducted in 2016 with a range of providers, health advocates, and Medicare beneficiaries explored perspectives on preventive service use. Providers indicated time and competing priorities as factors for not offering patients a full range of preventive services, while beneficiaries reported barriers related to knowledge, perception, and trust. Current healthcare reform efforts incorporating team-based care, nurses and other non-physician providers, and coordinated electronic health records could support enhanced use of preventive services if fully implemented and utilized.

Correction to: Inequality and Innovation: Barriers and Facilitators to 17P Administration to Prevent Preterm Birth among Medicaid Participants.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake in the order of authors. The co-author "Sarah Benatar" should be the second author and "Brigette Courtot" should be the third author of the article.

A Framework for Rigorous Qualitative Research as a Component of Mixed Method Rapid-Cycle Evaluation.

As federal, state, and local governments continue to test innovative approaches to health care delivery, the ability to produce timely and reliable evidence of what works and why it works is crucial. There is limited literature on methodological approaches to rapid-cycle qualitative research. The purpose of this article is to describe the advantages and limitations of a broadly applicable framework for in-depth qualitative analysis placed within a larger rapid-cycle, multisite, mixed-method evaluation. This evaluation included multiple cycles of primary qualitative data collection and quarterly and annual reporting. Several strategies allowed us to be adaptable while remaining rigorous; these included planning for multiple waves of qualitative coding, a hybrid inductive/deductive approach informed by a cross-program evaluation framework, and use of a large team with specific program expertise. Lessons from this evaluation can inform researchers and evaluators functioning in rapid assessment or rapid-cycle evaluation contexts.

Inequality and Innovation: Barriers and Facilitators to 17P Administration to Prevent Preterm Birth among Medicaid Participants.

Objectives Strategies to prevent preterm birth are limited. 17 Alpha-Hydroxyprogesterone Caproate (17P) injections have been shown to be effective, but the intervention is under-used. This mixed methods study investigates barriers and facilitators to 17P administration among Medicaid and CHIP participants enrolled in Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns, a federal preterm birth prevention program. Methods Twenty-seven awardees with more than 200 sites in 30 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico enrolled approximately 46,000 women in Strong Start from 2013 to 2016. Participant data, including data on preterm birth and 17P, was collected for each woman. Intensive interviews (n = 211) conducted with Strong Start program staff and providers (n = 314) included questions about 17P provision. Results Of women whose data included a valid response regarding 17P initiation, 3919 had a prior preterm birth and current singleton pregnancy; 14.95% received 17P. Barriers to 17P administration include late entry to prenatal care, administrative burden of preauthorization, cost risks to providers, limits in scope of practice for non-physician providers, and social barriers among participants. Facilitators for provision include streamlined work flows and the option of home administration. Conclusions for Practice A universal insurance authorization process could mitigate many barriers to 17P use. Providers need continuing education regarding the effectiveness of 17P, and expanding scope of practice for non-physician prenatal care providers would increase access. Targeted program interventions can help to overcome social barriers Medicaid participants face in accessing care. Streamlined work processes and the option of home health services are two effective program-based facilitators for providing 17P to a Medicaid population.

Prescription Drug Use and Cost Trends Among Medicaid-Enrolled Children with Disruptive Behavioral Disorders.

Disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs) are the most common mental health conditions in children. These conditions profoundly affect healthcare utilization and costs. Service use, costs, and diagnostic trends among pediatric Medicaid beneficiaries provide information regarding healthcare quality and potential for smarter spending. Using nationwide Medicaid administrative data, this study investigates diagnoses, prescription drug fills, and payments in 49 states and D.C. from 2006 to 2009 in Medicaid beneficiaries age 20 and under. Psychotherapeutic drug prescriptions and payments were calculated as a proportion of prescription totals. Results were considered by age, gender, race, and state. The results show a trend of increasing DBD diagnosis. Among prescription claims for children with diagnosed DBD, psychotherapeutic drug claims represented 30-40% of prescription claims but over half of prescription costs. This study indicates increasing clinical and financial needs for Medicaid-enrolled children with DBDs. Medicaid could potentially foster reforms in pediatric DBD treatments, particularly regarding medication use.

Facilitators and Barriers to Healthy Pregnancy Spacing among Medicaid Beneficiaries: Findings from the National Strong Start Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Closely spaced, unintended pregnancies are common among Medicaid beneficiaries and create avoidable risks for women and infants, including preterm birth. The Strong Start for Mothers and Newborns Initiative, a program of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, intended to prevent preterm birth through psychosocially based enhanced prenatal care in maternity care homes, group prenatal care, and birth centers. Comprehensive care offers the opportunity for education and family planning to promote healthy pregnancy spacing. METHODS: As of March 30, 2016, there were 42,138 women enrolled in Strong Start and 23,377 women had given birth. Individual-level data were collected through three participant survey instruments and a medical chart review, and approximately one-half of women who had delivered (n = 10,374) had nonmissing responses on a postpartum survey that asked about postpartum family planning. Qualitative case studies were conducted annually for the first 3 years of the program and included 629 interviews with staff and 122 focus groups with 887 Strong Start participants. RESULTS: Most programs tried to promote healthy pregnancy spacing through family planning education and provision with some success. Group care sites in particular established protocols for patient-centered family planning education and decision making. Despite program efforts, however, barriers to uptake remained. These included state and institutional policies, provider knowledge and bias, lack of protocols for timing and content of education, and participant issues such as transportation or cultural preferences. CONCLUSIONS: The Strong Start initiative introduced a number of successful strategies for increasing women's knowledge regarding healthy pregnancy spacing and access to family planning. Multiple barriers can impact postpartum Medicaid participants' capacity to plan and space pregnancies, and addressing such issues holistically is an important strategy for facilitating healthy interpregnancy intervals.

Innovative Home Visit Models Associated With Reductions In Costs, Hospitalizations, And Emergency Department Use.

While studies of home-based care delivered by teams led by primary care providers have shown cost savings, little is known about outcomes when practice-extender teams-that is, teams led by registered nurses or lay health workers-provide home visits with similar components (for example, care coordination and education). We evaluated findings from five models funded by Health Care Innovation Awards of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Each model used a mix of different components to strengthen connections to primary care among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions; these connections included practice-extender home visits. Two models achieved significant reductions in Medicare expenditures, and three models reduced utilization in the form of emergency department visits, hospitalizations, or both for beneficiaries relative to comparators. These findings present a strong case for the potential value of home visits by practice-extender teams to reduce Medicare expenditures and service use in a particularly vulnerable and costly segment of the Medicare population.