Longitudinal participation in delivery and payment reform programs among US Primary Care Organizations.

OBJECTIVE: To assess longitudinal primary care organization participation patterns in large-scale reform programs and identify organizational characteristics associated with multiprogram participation. DATA SOURCES: Secondary data analysis of national program participation data over an eight-year period (2009-2016). STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective, observational study by creating a unique set of data linkages (including Medicare and Medicaid Meaningful Use and Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organization (MSSP ACO) participation from CMS, Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) participation from the National Committee for Quality Assurance, and organizational characteristics) to measure longitudinal participation and identify what types of organizations participate in one or more of these reform programs. We used multivariate models to identify organizational characteristics that differentiate those that participate in none, one, or two-to-three programs. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: We used Medicare claims to identify organizations that delivered primary care services (n = 56 ,287) and then linked organizations to program participation data and characteristics. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: No program achieved more than 50% participation across the 56,287 organizations in a given year, and participation levels flattened or decreased in later years. 36% of organizations did not participate in any program over the eight-year study period; 50% participated in one; 13% in two; and 1% in all three. 14.31% of organizations participated in five or more years of Meaningful Use while 3.84% of organizations participated in five years of the MSSP ACO Program and 0.64% participated in at least five years of PCMH. Larger organizations, those with younger providers, those with more primary care providers, and those with larger Medicare patient panels were more likely to participate in more programs. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Primary care transformation via use of voluntary programs, each with their own participation requirements and approach to incentives, has failed to broadly engage primary care organizations. Those that have chosen to participate in multiple programs are likely those already providing high-quality care.

Self-Care Capacity and Its Relationship to Age, Disability, and Perceived Well-Being in Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Self-care is a multicomponent set of capacities that influence beliefs about health and well-being. OBJECTIVES: We examined the relationship between self-care capacity, age, and disability status with two perceptions of well-being in a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: The current study is part of a multisite research project to determine factors associated with cross-sectional and longitudinal morbidity and mortality trajectories observed in Medicare beneficiaries. Variable selection was informed by the health disparities and outcomes model. Using data from the 2013 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey and logistic regression models, we determined associations between self-care capacity, including indicators of self-care ability and self-care agency and two perceptions of well-being. Participants were divided into four groups based on how they qualified for Medicare: (a) over 65 years of age, and below 65 years of age and disabled because of (b) physical or (c) mental disorder, or (d) disabled and could not be classified as physically or mentally disabled as the primary cause of eligibility. RESULTS: Self-care ability limitations in activities of daily living (ADL), instrumental activities of living (IADL), and social activity participation were associated with both health perceptions. Those with physical disabilities reported more ADL and IADL limitations when compared with the other eligibility groups and were significantly more likely to have negative health perceptions. Those with serious mental illness were most likely to report the most severe IADL limitations. The over 65 years of age group reported less self-care incapacity than the other three eligibility types. Other components of self-care, including health literacy, agency, and health behaviors, significantly influenced perceptions of health. Women and people identifying as non-Whites were more likely to have negative health perceptions. DISCUSSION: Self-care capacity is a complex construct, and its varied elements have differential relationships with perceptions of well-being. Those with physical disabilities reported more self-care limitations, poorer perceived health, and more health worries than the other groups. Still, there were different patterns of self-care capacities in the serious mental illness type-especially in IADL limitations. The study adds empirical evidence to previous research documenting inequities in health outcomes for women and non-Whites. Findings provide empirical support for the health disparities and outcomes model.

Organizational Characteristics Associated with High Performance in Medicare's Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care Initiative.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Medicare plans to extend financial structures tested through the Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care (CEC) Initiative-an alternative payment model for maintenance dialysis providers-to promote high-value care for beneficiaries with kidney failure. The End-Stage Renal Disease Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs) that formed under the CEC Initiative varied greatly in their ability to generate cost savings and improve patient health outcomes. This study examined whether organizational or community characteristics were associated with ESCOs' performance. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We used a retrospective pooled cross-sectional analysis of all 37 ESCOs participating in the CEC Initiative during 2015-2018 (n=87 ESCO-years). Key exposures included ESCO characteristics: number of dialysis facilities, number and types of physicians, and years of CEC Initiative experience. Outcomes of interest included were above versus below median gross financial savings (2.4%) and standardized mortality ratio (0.93). We analyzed unadjusted differences between high- and low-performing ESCOs and then used multivariable logistic regression to construct average marginal effect estimates for parameters of interest. RESULTS: Above-median gross savings were obtained by 23 (52%) ESCOs with no program experience, 14 (32%) organizations with 1 year of experience, and seven (16%) organizations with 2 years of experience. The adjusted likelihoods of achieving above-median gross savings were 23 (95% confidence interval, 8 to 37) and 48 (95% confidence interval, 24 to 68) percentage points higher for ESCOs with 1 or 2 years of program experience, respectively (versus none). The adjusted likelihood of achieving above-median gross savings was 1.7 (95% confidence interval, -3 to -1) percentage points lower with each additional affiliated dialysis facility. Adjusted mortality rates were lower for ESCOs located in areas with higher socioeconomic status. CONCLUSIONS: Smaller ESCOs, organizations with more experience in the CEC Initiative, and those located in more affluent areas performed better under the CEC Initiative.

First Year of Skilled Nursing Facility Value-based Purchasing Program Penalizes Facilities With Poorer Financial Performance.

BACKGROUND: The Skilled Nursing Facility Value-based Purchasing Program (SNF-VBP) incentivizes facilities to coordinate care, improve quality, and lower hospital readmissions. However, SNF-VBP may unintentionally punish facilities with lower profit margins struggling to invest resources to lower readmissions. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the SNF-VBP penalty amounts by skilled nursing facility (SNF) profit margin quintiles and examine whether facilities with lower profit margins are more likely to be penalized by SNF-VBP. RESEARCH DESIGN: We combined the first round of SNF-VBP performance data with SNF profit margins and characteristics data. Our outcome variables included estimated penalty amount and a binary measure for whether facilities were penalized by the SNF-VBP. We categorized SNFs into 5 profit margin quintiles and examined the relationship between profit margins and SNF-VBP performance using descriptive and regression analysis. RESULTS: The average profit margins for SNFs in the lowest profit margin quintile was -14.4% compared with the average profit margin of 11.1% for SNFs in the highest profit margin quintile. In adjusted regressions, SNFs in the lowest profit margin quintile had 17% higher odds of being penalized under SNF-VBP compared with facilities in the highest profit margin quintile. The average penalty for SNFs in the lowest profit margin quintile was $22,312. CONCLUSIONS: SNFs in the lowest profit margins are more likely to be penalized by the SNF-VBP, and these losses can exacerbate quality problems in SNFs with lower quality. Alternative approaches to measuring and rewarding SNFs under SNF-VBP or programs to assist struggling SNFs is warranted, particularly considering the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, which requires resources for prevention and management.

Changes in Hospital-acquired Conditions and Mortality Associated With the Hospital-acquired Condition Reduction Program.

IMPORTANCE: To improve patient safety, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) in August 2013. The program reduces Medicare payments by 1% for hospitals in the lowest performance quartile related to hospital-acquired conditions. Performance measures are focused on perioperative care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in HACs and 30-day mortality after the announcement of the HACRP. DESIGN: Interrupted time-series design using Medicare Provider and Analysis Review (MEDPAR) claims data. We estimated models with linear splines to test for changes in HACs and 30-day mortality before the Affordable Care Act (ACA), after the ACA, and after the HACRP. SETTING: Fee-for-service Medicare 2009-2015. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries undergoing surgery and discharged from an acute care hospital between January 2009 and August 2015 (N = 8,857,877). MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Changes in HACs and 30-day mortality after the announcement of the HACRP. RESULTS: Patients experienced HACs at a rate of 13.39 per 1000 discharges [95% confidence interval (CI), 13.10 to 13.68] in the pre-ACA period. This declined after the ACA was passed and declined further after the HACRP announcement [adjusted difference in annual slope, -1.34 (95% CI, -1.64 to -1.04)]. Adjusted 30-day mortality was 3.69 (95% CI, 3.64 to 3.74) in the pre-ACA period among patients receiving surgery. Thirty-day mortality continued to decline after the ACA [adjusted annual slope -0.04 (95% CI, -0.05 to -0.02)] but was flat after the HACRP [adjusted annual slope -0.01 (95% CI, -0.04 to 0.02)]. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although hospital-acquired conditions targeted under the HACRP declined at a greater rate after the program was announced, 30-day mortality was unchanged.

Optimal NIV Medicare Access Promotion: Patients With COPD: A Technical Expert Panel Report From the American College of Chest Physicians, the American Association for Respiratory Care, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, and the American Thoracic Society.

This document summarizes the work of the COPD Technical Expert Panel working group. For patients with COPD, the most pressing current coverage barriers identified were onerous diagnostic requirements focused on oxygenation (rather than ventilation) and difficulty obtaining bilevel devices with backup rate capabilities. Because of these difficulties, many patients with COPD were instead sometimes prescribed home mechanical ventilators. Critical evidence supports changes to current policies, including randomized controlled trial evidence suggesting a mortality benefit from bilevel positive airway pressure with backup rate and updated clinical practice guidelines from the American Thoracic Society as well as the European Respiratory Society. To achieve optimal access to noninvasive ventilation for patients with COPD, we make the following key recommendations: (1) removal of the need for overnight oximetry testing; (2) the ability to initiate therapy using bilevel devices with backup rate capability; and (3) increased duration of time to meet adherence criteria (ie, a second 90-day trial period) in those patients actively engaged in their care. Clear guidelines based on medical necessity are also included for patients who require initiation of or switch to a home mechanical ventilator. Adoption of these proposed recommendations would result in the right device, for the right type of patient with COPD, at the right time. Finally, we emphasize the need for adequate clinical support during initiation and maintenance of home noninvasive ventilation in such patients.

Optimal NIV Medicare Access Promotion: Patients With Central Sleep Apnea: A Technical Expert Panel Report From the American College of Chest Physicians, the American Association for Respiratory Care, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, and the American Thoracic Society.

This document summarizes suggestions of the central sleep apnea (CSA) Technical Expert Panel working group. This paper shares our vision for bringing the right device to the right patient at the right time. For patients with CSA, current coverage criteria do not align with guideline treatment recommendations. For example, CPAP and oxygen therapy are recommended but not covered for CSA. On the other hand, bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP) without a backup rate may be a covered therapy for OSA, but it may worsen CSA. Narrow coverage criteria that require near elimination of obstructive breathing events on CPAP or BPAP in the spontaneous mode, even if at poorly tolerated pressure levels, may preclude therapy with BPAP with backup rate or adaptive servoventilation, even when those devices provide demonstrably better therapy. CSA is a dynamic disorder that may require different treatments over time, sometimes switching from one device to another; an example is switching from BPAP with backup rate to an adaptive servoventilation with automatic end-expiratory pressure adjustments, which may not be covered. To address these challenges, we suggest several changes to the coverage determinations, including: (1) a single simplified initial and continuing coverage definition of CSA that aligns with OSA; (2) removal of hypoventilation terminology from coverage criteria for CSA; (3) all effective therapies for CSA should be covered, including oxygen and all PAP devices with or without backup rates or servo-mechanisms; and (4) patients shown to have a suboptimal response to one PAP device should be allowed to add oxygen or change to another PAP device with different capabilities if shown to be effective with testing.

Optimal NIV Medicare Access Promotion: Patients With Hypoventilation Syndromes: A Technical Expert Panel Report From the American College of Chest Physicians, the American Association for Respiratory Care, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, and the American Thoracic Society.

The existing coverage criteria for home noninvasive ventilation (NIV) do not recognize the diversity of hypoventilation syndromes and advances in technologies. This document summarizes the work of the hypoventilation syndromes Technical Expert Panel working group. The most pressing current coverage barriers identified were: (1) overreliance on arterial blood gases (particularly during sleep); (2) need to perform testing on prescribed oxygen; (3) requiring a sleep study to rule out OSA as the cause of sustained hypoxemia; (4) need for spirometry; (5) need to show bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP) without a backup rate failure to qualify for BPAP spontaneous/timed; and (6) qualifying hospitalized patients for home NIV therapy at the time of discharge. Critical evidence support for changes to current policies includes randomized controlled trial evidence and clinical practice guidelines. To decrease morbidity and mortality by achieving timely access to NIV for patients with hypoventilation, particularly those with obesity hypoventilation syndrome, we make the following key suggestions: (1) given the significant technological advances, we advise acceptance of surrogate noninvasive end-tidal and transcutaneous Pco2 and venous blood gases in lieu of arterial blood gases; (2) not requiring Pco2 measures while on prescribed oxygen; (3) not requiring a sleep study to avoid delays in care in patients being discharged from the hospital; (4) remove spirometry as a requirement; and (5) not requiring BPAP without a backup rate failure to approve BPAP spontaneous/timed. The overarching goal of the Technical Expert Panel is to establish pathways that improve clinicians' management capability to provide Medicare beneficiaries access to appropriate home NIV therapy. Adoption of these proposed suggestions would result in the right device, for the right type of patient with hypoventilation syndromes, at the right time.

Optimal NIV Medicare Access Promotion: Patients With Thoracic Restrictive Disorders: A Technical Expert Panel Report From the American College of Chest Physicians, the American Association for Respiratory Care, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, and the American Thoracic Society.

The existing coverage criteria for noninvasive ventilation (NIV) do not recognize the benefits of early initiation of NIV for those with thoracic restrictive disorders and do not address the unique needs for daytime support as the patients progress to ventilator dependence. This document summarizes the work of the thoracic restrictive disorder Technical Expert Panel working group. The most pressing current coverage barriers identified were: (1) delays in implementing NIV treatment; (2) lack of coverage for many nonprogressive neuromuscular diseases; and (3) lack of clear policy indications for home mechanical ventilation (HMV) support in thoracic restrictive disorders. To best address these issues, we make the following key recommendations: (1) given the need to encourage early initiation of NIV with bilevel positive airway pressure devices, we recommend that symptoms be considered as a reason to initiate therapy even at mildly reduced FVCs; (2) broaden CO2 measurements to include surrogates such as transcutaneous, end-tidal, or venous blood gas; (3) expand the diagnostic category to include phrenic nerve injuries and disorders of central drive; (4) allow a bilevel positive airway pressure device to be advanced to an HMV when the vital capacity is < 30% or to address severe daytime respiratory symptoms; and (5) provide additional HMV when the patient is ventilator dependent with use > 18 h per day. Adoption of these proposed recommendations would result in the right device, at the right time, for the right type of patients with thoracic restrictive disorders.

Optimal NIV Medicare Access Promotion: Patients With OSA: A Technical Expert Panel Report From the American College of Chest Physicians, the American Association for Respiratory Care, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, and the American Thoracic Society.

This document summarizes the work of the CPAP and bilevel PAP therapy for OSA Technical Expert Panel working group. For positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy, the most pressing current coverage barriers identified were: an insufficient symptom list describing all potential symptoms in patients with mild OSA; the 4 h per night of PAP usage requirement to keep the device; the additional sleep studies requirement to re-qualify for PAP or supplemental oxygen; and the inability to use telehealth visits for follow-up visits. Critical evidence supports changes to current policies and includes: symptom list inadequate to cover all scenarios based on updated clinical practice guidelines; published evidence that 2 h per night of PAP use can result in benefit to quality of life and other metrics; the costs of another sleep study not justified for all nonadherent patients or for supplemental oxygen due to other types of assessment currently available; and the remarkable success and acceptance of telehealth visits. To achieve optimal access for patients on PAP therapy, we make the following key suggestions: removing symptom criteria for mild OSA; reduce continued coverage criteria to > 2 h per night; eliminate the need for a sleep study to re-qualify if nonadherent or for new Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services beneficiaries already on and adherent to PAP therapy; allow telehealth visits for documenting benefit and adherence; and allow PAP reports and domiciliary oximetry to qualify for supplemental oxygen with PAP if needed. This paper shares our best vision for bringing the right device to the right patient at the right time.

Improving target price calculations in Medicare bundled payment programs.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive accuracy of two approaches to target price calculations under Bundled Payments for Care Improvement-Advanced (BPCI-A): the traditional Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) methodology and an empirical Bayes approach designed to mitigate the effects of regression to the mean. DATA SOURCES: Medicare fee-for-service claims for beneficiaries discharged from acute care hospitals between 2010 and 2016. STUDY DESIGN: We used data from a baseline period (discharges between January 1, 2010 and September 30, 2013) to predict spending in a performance period (discharges between October 1, 2015 and June 30, 2016). For 23 clinical episode types in BPCI-A, we compared the average prediction error across hospitals associated with each statistical approach. We also calculated an average across all clinical episode types and explored differences by hospital size. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We used a 20% sample of Medicare claims, excluding hospitals and episode types with small numbers of observations. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The empirical Bayes approach resulted in significantly more accurate episode spending predictions for 19 of 23 clinical episode types. Across all episode types, prediction error averaged $8456 for the CMS approach versus $7521 for the empirical Bayes approach. Greater improvements in accuracy were observed with increasing hospital size. CONCLUSIONS: CMS should consider using empirical Bayes methods to calculate target prices for BPCI-A.

Using decision trees to determine participation in bundled payments in sepsis cases.

RATIONALE: The purpose of this research is to determine and develop a valid analytical method that can be easily implemented by providers to evaluate whether they should join the bundled payments for care improvement (BPCI) advanced bundled payment program, and analyze the projected impacts of BPCI advanced payment on their margins. METHODS: We have developed a decision tree model that incorporates the types of sepsis encountered and the resultant typical complications and associated costs. RESULTS: The initial cost of a sepsis episode was $30,386. Since Medicare requires that there is a 3% cost reduction under BPCI, we applied the model with a 3% cost reduction across the board. Since the model considers probabilities of the complications and readmission, there was actually a 3.36% reduction in costs when the 3% reduction was added to the model. We applied 2-way sensitivity analysis to the intensive care unit (ICU) long and short costs. We used the unbundled cost at the high end, and a 10% reduction at the low end. Per patient episode cost varied between $28,117 and $29,658. This is a 5.2% difference between low and high end. Next, we looked at varying the hospital bed (non-ICU) costs. Here the resultant cost varied between $28,708 and $29,099. This is only a 1.34% difference between low and high ends. Finally, we applied a sensitivity analysis varying the attending physician and the intensivist reimbursement fees. The result was a cost that varied between $29,191 and $29,366 which is a difference of only 0.595%. CONCLUSION: This is the precise environment where decision tree analysis modeling is essential. This analysis can guide the hospital in just how to allocate resources in light of the new BPCI advanced payment model.

Hospital effects drive variation in access to inpatient rehabilitation after trauma.

BACKGROUND: Postacute care rehabilitation is critically important to recover after trauma, but many patients do not have access. A better understanding of the drivers behind inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) use has the potential for major cost-savings as well as higher-quality and more equitable patient care. We sought to quantify the variation in hospital rates of trauma patient discharge to inpatient rehabilitation and understand which factors (patient vs. injury vs. hospital level) contribute the most. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 668,305 adult trauma patients admitted to 900 levels I to IV trauma centers between 2011 and 2015 using the National Trauma Data Bank. Participants were included if they met the following criteria: age >18 years, Injury Severity Score of ≥9, identifiable injury type, and who had one of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services preferred diagnoses for inpatient rehabilitation under the "60% rule." RESULTS: The overall risk- and reliability-adjusted hospital rates of discharge to IRF averaged 18.8% in the nonelderly adult cohort (18-64 years old) and 23.4% in the older adult cohort (65 years or older). Despite controlling for all patient-, injury-, and hospital-level factors, hospital discharge of patients to IRF varied substantially between hospital quintiles and ranged from 9% to 30% in the nonelderly adult cohort and from 7% to 46% in the older adult cohort. Proportions of total variance ranged from 2.4% (patient insurance) to 12.1% (injury-level factors) in the nonelderly adult cohort and from 0.3% (patient-level factors) to 26.0% (unmeasured hospital-level factors) in the older adult cohort. CONCLUSION: Among a cohort of injured patients with diagnoses that are associated with significant rehabilitation needs, the hospital at which a patient receives their care may drive a patient's likelihood of recovering at an IRF just as much, if not more, than their clinical attributes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management, level IV.

Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes After the Introduction of the Medicare Sepsis Performance Measure (SEP-1).

BACKGROUND: Medicare requires that hospitals report on their adherence to the Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Early Management Bundle (SEP-1). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of SEP-1 on treatment patterns and patient outcomes. DESIGN: Longitudinal study of hospitals using repeated cross-sectional cohorts of patients. SETTING: 11 hospitals within an integrated health system. PATIENTS: 54 225 encounters between January 2013 and December 2017 for adults with sepsis who were hospitalized through the emergency department. INTERVENTION: Onset of the SEP-1 reporting requirement in October 2015. MEASUREMENTS: Changes in SEP-1-targeted processes, including antibiotic administration, lactate measurement, and fluid administration at 3 hours from sepsis onset; repeated lactate and vasopressor administration for hypotension within 6 hours of sepsis onset; and sepsis outcomes, including risk-adjusted intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital mortality, and home discharge among survivors. RESULTS: Two years after its implementation, SEP-1 was associated with variable changes in process measures, with the greatest effect being an increase in lactate measurement within 3 hours of sepsis onset (absolute increase, 23.7 percentage points [95% CI, 20.7 to 26.7 percentage points]; P < 0.001). There were small increases in antibiotic administration (absolute increase, 4.7 percentage points [CI, 1.9 to 7.6 percentage points]; P = 0.001) and fluid administration of 30 mL/kg of body weight within 3 hours of sepsis onset (absolute increase, 3.4 percentage points [CI, 1.5 to 5.2 percentage points]; P < 0.001). There was no change in vasopressor administration. There was a small increase in ICU admissions (absolute increase, 2.0 percentage points [CI, 0 to 4.0 percentage points]; P = 0.055) and no changes in mortality (absolute change, 0.1 percentage points [CI, -0.9 to 1.1 percentage points]; P = 0.87) or discharge to home. LIMITATION: Data are from a single health system. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the SEP-1 mandatory reporting program was associated with variable changes in process measures, without improvements in clinical outcomes. Revising the measure may optimize its future effect. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Does Medicaid coverage of Medicare cost sharing affect physician care for dual-eligible Medicare beneficiaries?

OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in physicians' provision of care to duals (low-income individuals with Medicare and Medicaid) in response to a policy that required Medicaid to fully pay Medicare's cost sharing for office visits with these patients. This policy-a provision of the Affordable Care Act-effectively increased payments for office visits with duals by 0%-20%, depending on the state, in 2013 and 2014. DATA SOURCES: Fee-for-service claims for a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries in 2010-2016. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a difference-in-differences analysis to compare changes in office visits among Qualified Medicare Beneficiaries (QMBs)-the largest subpopulation of duals for whom payment rates were affected by this policy-to changes among other low-income Medicare beneficiaries for whom payment rates were unaffected (pooled across all states). Next, we conducted a triple-differences analysis that compared changes between QMBs and other low-income beneficiaries in 33 states with payment rate increases of approximately 20% to analogous changes in 14 states without payment increases. DATA COLLECTION: The study included administrative Medicare enrollment and claims data for QMBs and a comparison group of other low-income Medicare beneficiaries (1 914 073 beneficiary-years from 2010 to 2016). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Nationally, we did not find a differential increase in office visits among QMBs versus other low-income beneficiaries that coincided with this payment change. In the triple-differences analysis, we did not observe a greater increase in visits among QMBs vs other low-income beneficiaries in states where the policy resulted in large (approximately 20%) increases in payment rates vs states where payment rates were unaffected (triple-differences estimate: -0.12 annual visits, 95% CI: -0.28, 0.04; P = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' provision of care to low-income Medicare beneficiaries may not be responsive to short-run payment changes.