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.

The one-year impact of accountable care networks among Washington State employees.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of a new, two-sided risk model accountable care network (ACN) on Washington State employees and their families. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Administrative data (January 2013-December 2016) on Washington State employees. STUDY DESIGN: We compared monthly health care utilization, health care intensity as measured through proxy pricing, and annual HEDIS quality metrics between the five intervention counties to 13 comparison counties, analyzed separately by age categories (ages 0-5, 6-18, 19-26, 18-64). DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We used difference-in-difference methods and generalized estimating equations to estimate the effects after 1 year of implementation for adults and children. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We estimate a 1-2 percentage point decrease in outpatient hospital visits due to the introduction of ACNs (adults: -1.8, P < .01; age 0-5: -1.2, P = .07; age 6-18: -1.2, P = .06; age 19-26; -1.2, P < .01). We find changes in primary and specialty care office visits; the direction of impact varies by age. Dependents age 19-26 were also responsive with inpatient admissions declines (-0.08 percentage points, P = .02). Despite changes in utilization, there was no evidence of changes in intensity of care and mixed results in the quality measures. CONCLUSIONS: Washington's state employee ACN introduction changed health care utilization patterns in the first year but was not as successful in improving quality.

Patient Experiences of Integrated Care in Medicare Accountable Care Organizations and Medicare Advantage Versus Traditional Fee-for-Service.

BACKGROUND: Health insurance design can influence the extent to which clinical care is well-coordinated. Through alternative payment models, Medicare Advantage (MA) and Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) have the potential to improve integration relative to traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare. OBJECTIVE: To characterize patient experiences of integrated care within Medicare and identify whether MA or ACO beneficiaries perceive greater integration than FFS beneficiaries. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the 2015 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey. SUBJECTS: Nationally representative sample of 11,978 Medicare beneficiaries. MEASURES: Main outcomes included 8 previously derived domains of patient-perceived integrated care (PPIC), measured on a scale of 1-4. RESULTS: The final sample was 55% female with a mean (SD) age of 71.1 (11.3). In unadjusted analyses, we observed considerable variation across PPIC domains in the full sample, but little variation across subsamples defined by coverage type within a given PPIC domain. In linear models adjusting for a rich set of patient characteristics, we observe no significant benefits of ACOs nor MA relative to FFS, a finding which is robust to alternative specifications and adjustment for multiple comparisons. We similarly observed no benefits in subgroup analyses restricted to states with relatively high market penetration of ACOs or MA. CONCLUSIONS: Despite characteristics of ACOs and MA that theoretically promote integrated care, we find that PPIC is largely similar across coverage types in Medicare.

Medicare Accountable Care Organizations and the Adoption of New Surgical Technology.

BACKGROUND: Dissemination of new surgical technology is a major contributor to healthcare spending growth. Accountable care organization (ACO) policy aims to control spending while maintaining quality. As a result, ACOs provide incentive for hospitals to selectively adopt newer procedures with high value. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a 20% sample of national Medicare claims from 2010 to 2015. We identified hospitals that performed 1 of 6 sets of procedures: abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, aortic valve replacement, carotid endarterectomy or stent, lung lobectomy, colectomy, and prostatectomy. We identified hospitals participating in a Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO and a set of matched non-ACO control hospitals. We used a difference-in-differences approach to compare rate of surgical treatment and use of newer surgical technology for each set of procedures in ACO and non-ACO hospitals. RESULTS: We included 707 ACO-hospitals and 1,770 control hospitals. ACO hospitals performed surgery for carotid stenosis at a lower rate than non-ACO hospitals. There was no difference in the rate of surgical treatment for all other procedure sets. ACO hospitals were less likely to use an endovascular approach for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (85.2% vs 88.2%, p < 0.001) and more likely to use a minimally invasive approach for lung lobectomy (42.2% vs 34.7%, p = 0.004) than non-ACO hospitals. In difference-in-differences analysis, ACO participation was not associated with any significant difference in use of surgical care for any of the 6 procedure sets, nor with any significant difference in use of newer surgical technology. CONCLUSIONS: Despite ACO policy incentives to selectively adopt newer surgical technology, ACO participation was not associated with differences in rate of surgery or use of newer surgical technology for 6 major surgical procedures.

Value-Based Payment Reforms in Cardiovascular Care: Progress to Date and Next Steps.

In an effort to curb excessive health care spending and incentivize high-quality care, many payers have implemented value-based payment reforms designed to pay for the quality rather than the quantity of health care services. Medicare, the largest payer in the United States, has implemented numerous value-based payment policies over the past decade, many of which affect cardiovascular care. In this review, we discuss some of these major nationwide value-based payment reforms as they relate to cardiovascular care and what we may expect in the future from cardiovascular value-based policies.

Accountable Care Organizations and Spending for Patients Undergoing Long-Term Dialysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite representing 1% of the population, beneficiaries on long-term dialysis account for over 7% of Medicare's fee-for-service spending. Because of their focus on care coordination, Accountable Care Organizations may be an effective model to reduce spending inefficiencies for this population. We analyzed Medicare data to examine time trends in long-term dialysis beneficiary alignment to Accountable Care Organizations and differences in spending for those who were Accountable Care Organization aligned versus nonaligned. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In this retrospective cohort study, beneficiaries on long-term dialysis between 2009 and 2016 were identified using a 20% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries. Trends in alignment to an Accountable Care Organization were compared with alignment of the general Medicare population from 2012 to 2016. Using an interrupted time series approach, we examined the association between Accountable Care Organization alignment and the primary outcome of total spending for long-term dialysis beneficiaries from prior to Accountable Care Organization implementation (2009-2011) through implementation of the Comprehensive ESRD Care model in October 2015. We fit linear regression models with generalized estimating equations to adjust for patient characteristics. RESULTS: During the study period, 135,152 beneficiaries on long-term dialysis were identified. The percentage of long-term dialysis beneficiaries aligned to an Accountable Care Organization increased from 6% to 23% from 2012 to 2016. In the time series analysis, spending on Accountable Care Organization-aligned beneficiaries was $143 (95% confidence interval, $5 to $282) less per beneficiary-quarter than spending for nonaligned beneficiaries. In analyses stratified by whether beneficiaries received care from a primary care physician, savings by Accountable Care Organization-aligned beneficiaries were limited to those with care by a primary care physician ($235; 95% confidence interval, $73 to $397). CONCLUSIONS: There was a substantial increase in the percentage of long-term dialysis beneficiaries aligned to an Accountable Care Organization from 2012 to 2016. Moreover, in adjusted models, Accountable Care Organization alignment was associated with modest cost savings among long-term dialysis beneficiaries with care by a primary care physician.

Are ACOs Ready to be Accountable for Medication Use?

BACKGROUND: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have the potential to lower costs and improve quality through incentives and coordinated care. However, the design brings with it many new challenges. One such challenge is the optimal use of pharmaceuticals. Most ACOs have not yet focused on this integral facet of care, even though medications are a critical component to achieving the lower costs and improved quality that are anticipated with this new model. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether ACOs are prepared to maximize the value of medications for achieving quality benchmarks and cost offsets. METHODS: During the fall of 2012, an electronic readiness self-assessment was developed using a portion of the questions and question methodology from the National Survey of Accountable Care Organizations, along with original questions developed by the authors. The assessment was tested and subsequently revised based on feedback from pilot testing with 5 ACO representatives. The revised assessment was distributed via e-mail to a convenience sample (n=175) of ACO members of the American Medical Group Association, Brookings-Dartmouth ACO Learning Network, and Premier Healthcare Alliance. RESULTS: The self-assessment was completed by 46 ACO representatives (26% response rate). ACOs reported high readiness to manage medications in a few areas, such as transmitting prescriptions electronically (70%), being able to integrate medical and pharmacy data into a single database (54%), and having a formulary in place that encourages generic use when appropriate (50%). However, many areas have substantial room for improvement with few ACOs reporting high readiness. Some notable areas include being able to quantify the cost offsets and hence demonstrate the value of appropriate medication use (7%), notifying a physician when a prescription has been filled (9%), having protocols in place to avoid medication duplication and polypharmacy (17%), and having quality metrics in place for a broad diversity of conditions (22%). CONCLUSIONS: Developing the capabilities to support, monitor, and ensure appropriate medication use will be critical to achieve optimal patient outcomes and ACO success. The ACOs surveyed have embarked upon an important journey towards this goal, but critical gaps remain before they can become fully accountable. While many of these organizations have begun adopting health information technologies that allow them to maximize the value of medications for achieving quality outcomes and cost offsets, a significant lag was identified in their inability to use these technologies to their full capacities. In order to provide further guidance, the authors have begun documenting case studies for public release that would provide ACOs with examples of how certain medication issues have been addressed by ACOs or relevant organizations. The authors hope that these case studies will help ACOs optimize the value of pharmaceuticals and achieve the "triple aim" of improving care, health, and cost. DISCLOSURES: There was no outside funding for this study, and the authors report no conflicts of interest related to the article. Concept and design were primarily from Dubois and Kotzbauer, with help from Feldman, Penso, and Westrich. Data collection was done by Feldman, Penso, Pope, and Westrich, and all authors participated in data interpretation. The manuscript was written primarily by Westrich, with help from all other authors, and revision was done primarily by Lustig and Westrich, with help from all other authors.

Association between specialist compensation and Accountable Care Organization performance.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) using cost reduction measures in specialist compensation demonstrated better performance. DATA SOURCES: National, cross-sectional survey data on ACOs (2013-2015) linked to public-use data on ACO performance (2014-2016). STUDY DESIGN: We compared characteristics of ACOs that did and did not report use of cost reduction measures in specialist compensation and determined the association between using this approach and ACO savings, outpatient spending, and specialist visit rates. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Of 160 ACOs surveyed, 26 percent reported using cost reduction measures to help determine specialist compensation. ACOs using cost reduction in specialist compensation were more often physician-led (68.3 vs 49.6 percent) and served higher-risk patients (mean Hierarchical Condition Category score 1.09 vs 1.05). These ACOs had similar savings per beneficiary year (adjusted difference $82.6 [95% CI -77.9, 243.1]), outpatient spending per beneficiary year (-24.0 [95% CI -248.9, 200.8]), and specialist visits per 1000 beneficiary years (369.7 [95% CI -9.3, 748.7]). CONCLUSION: Incentivizing specialists on cost reduction was not associated with ACO savings in the short term. Further work is needed to determine the most effective approach to engage specialists in ACO efforts.

Savings or Selection? Initial Spending Reductions in the Medicare Shared Savings Program and Considerations for Reform.

Policy Points Concerns have been raised about risk selection in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). Specifically, turnover in accountable care organization (ACO) physicians and patient panels has led to concerns that ACOs may be earning shared-savings bonuses by selecting lower-risk patients or providers with lower-risk panels. We find no evidence that changes in ACO patient populations explain savings estimates from previous evaluations through 2015. We also find no evidence that ACOs systematically manipulated provider composition or billing to earn bonuses. The modest savings and lack of risk selection in the original MSSP design suggest opportunities to build on early progress. Recent program changes provide ACOs with more opportunity to select providers with lower-risk patients. Understanding the effect of these changes will be important for guiding future payment policy. CONTEXT: The Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) establishes incentives for participating accountable care organizations (ACOs) to lower spending for their attributed fee-for-service Medicare patients. Turnover in ACO physicians and patient panels has raised concerns that ACOs may be earning shared-savings bonuses by selecting lower-risk patients or providers with lower-risk panels. METHODS: We conducted three sets of analyses of Medicare claims data. First, we estimated overall MSSP savings through 2015 using a difference-in-differences approach and methods that eliminated selection bias from ACO program exit or changes in the practices or physicians included in ACO contracts. We then checked for residual risk selection at the patient level. Second, we reestimated savings with methods that address undetected risk selection but could introduce bias from other sources. These included patient fixed effects, baseline or prospective assignment, and area-level MSSP exposure to hold patient populations constant. Third, we tested for changes in provider composition or provider billing that may have contributed to bonuses, even if they were eliminated as sources of bias in the evaluation analyses. FINDINGS: MSSP participation was associated with modest and increasing annual gross savings in the 2012-2013 entry cohorts of ACOs that reached $139 to $302 per patient by 2015. Savings in the 2014 entry cohort were small and not statistically significant. Robustness checks revealed no evidence of residual risk selection. Alternative methods to address risk selection produced results that were substantively consistent with our primary analysis but varied somewhat and were more sensitive to adjustment for patient characteristics, suggesting the introduction of bias from within-patient changes in time-varying characteristics. We found no evidence of ACO manipulation of provider composition or billing to inflate savings. Finally, larger savings for physician group ACOs were robust to consideration of differential changes in organizational structure among non-ACO providers (eg, from consolidation). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the original MSSP program was associated with modest savings and not with favorable risk selection. These findings suggest an opportunity to build on early progress. Understanding the effect of new opportunities and incentives for risk selection in the revamped MSSP will be important for guiding future program reforms.

Trends in Costs of Care and Utilization for Medicaid Patients With Diabetes in Accountable Care Communities.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes have complex care needs. The Accountable Care Communities (ACC) Program is a practice-level intervention implemented by UnitedHealthcare to improve care for Medicaid beneficiaries. We examined changes in costs and utilization for Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes assigned to ACC versus usual care practices. RESEARCH DESIGN: Interrupted time series with concurrent control group analysis, at the person-month level. The ACC was implemented in 14 states, and we selected comparison non-ACC practices from those states to control for state-level variation in Medicaid program. We adjusted the models for age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidities, seasonality, and state-by-year fixed effects. We examined the difference between ACC and non-ACC practices in changes in the time trends of expenditures and hospital and emergency room utilization, for the 4 largest categories of Medicaid eligibility [Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, Supplemental Security Income (without Medicare), Expansion, Dual-Eligible]. SUBJECTS/MEASURES: Eligibility and claims data from Medicaid adults with diabetes from 14 states between 2010 and 2016, before and after ACC implementation. RESULTS: Analyses included 1,200,460 person-months from 66,450 Medicaid patients with diabetes. ACC implementation was not associated with significant changes in outcome time trends, relative to comparators, for all Medicaid categories. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid patients assigned to ACC practices had no changes in cost or utilization over 3 years of follow-up, compared with patients assigned to non-ACC practices. The ACC program may not reduce costs or utilization for Medicaid patients with diabetes.

A Sleeping Giant: Community Pharmacy's Potential Is Unrivaled.

DISCLOSURES: No funding was received for the writing of this commentary. The author has nothing to disclose.

Spending variation among ACOs in the Medicare Shared Savings Program.

OBJECTIVES: Understanding variation in spending across organizations, rather than across geographic areas, is important because care is delivered by organizations and interventions increasingly focus on organizations. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) are particularly important to study given their incentives to reduce spending. Analyzing spending differences across ACOs may help identify cost savings opportunities. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of Medicare claims. METHODS: We stratified ACOs into quartiles based on the deviation between each ACO's risk-adjusted spending and average risk-adjusted fee-for-service spending in the same market (hospital referral region). We compared spending between top- and bottom-quartile ACOs on each of 7 major service categories and 10 clinical condition groups to identify areas of potential savings. We simulated spending reductions if ACOs with high adjusted spending reduced spending to the levels of lower-spending ACOs. RESULTS: In 2016, geographically adjusted and risk-adjusted total per-beneficiary spending for the highest-spending quartile of ACOs was 14% higher than for ACOs in the lowest quartile. Variation between high- and low-spending ACOs was greatest, at 27%, in the use of skilled nursing facilities-a service category in which ACOs have reduced spending by the greatest percentage. Inpatient care was the largest driver of absolute dollar differences in spending, however, accounting for 37% of the total spread. If spending in ACOs above median adjusted spending were brought down to the median, savings would be 3% to 4%. CONCLUSIONS: By extending the variations literature to focus on ACOs, we illustrated that meaningful further savings opportunities exist both within and across markets.

Association of the Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care Model With Medicare Payments and Quality of Care for Beneficiaries With End-Stage Renal Disease.

Importance: Medicare beneficiaries with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are a medically complex group accounting for less than 1% of the Medicare population but more than 7% of Medicare fee-for-service payments. Objective: To evaluate the association of the Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care (CEC) model with Medicare payments, health care use, and quality of care. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this economic evaluation, a difference-in-differences design estimated the change in outcomes for 73 094 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aligned to CEC dialysis facilities between the baseline (from January 2014 to March 2015) and intervention periods (from October 2015 to December 2017) relative to 60 464 beneficiaries at matched dialysis facilities. In the CEC model, dialysis facilities, nephrologists, and other providers partner to form ESRD Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs), specialty-oriented accountable care organizations that coordinate care for beneficiaries with ESRD. ESCOs with expenditures below a benchmark set by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services are eligible to share in savings if they meet quality thresholds. A total of 685 dialysis facilities affiliated with 37 ESCOs participated in the CEC model as of January 2017. Thirteen ESCOs joined the CEC model on October 1, 2015 (wave 1), and 24 ESCOs joined on January 1, 2017 (wave 2). Patients with ESRD who were aligned with CEC dialysis facilities were compared with patients at matched dialysis facilities. Main Outcomes and Measures: Medicare total and service-specific payments per beneficiary per month; hospitalizations, readmissions, and emergency department visits; and select quality measures. Results: Relative to the comparison group (n = 60 464; 55% men; mean [SD] age, 63.5 [14.4] years), total Medicare payments for CEC beneficiaries (n = 73 094; 56% men; mean [SD] age, 63.0 [14.4] years) decreased by $114 in payments per beneficiary per month (95% CI, -$202 to -$26; P = .01), associated primarily with decreases in payments for hospitalizations and readmissions. Payment reductions were offset by shared savings payments to ESCOs, resulting in net losses of $78 in payments per beneficiary per month (95% CI, -$8 to $164; P = .07). Relative to the comparison group, CEC beneficiaries had 5.01 fewer hospitalizations per 1000 beneficiaries per month (95% CI, -8.45 to -1.56; P = .004), as well as fewer catheter placements (CEC beneficiaries with catheter as vascular access for periods longer than 90 days decreased by 0.78 percentage points [95% CI, -1.36 to -0.19; P = .01]) and fewer hospitalizations for ESRD complications (CEC beneficiaries were 0.11 percentage points less likely [95% CI, -0.20 to -0.02; P = .01] to be hospitalized in a given month). Total dialysis sessions and payments increased, suggesting improved adherence to dialysis treatments. Conclusions and Relevance: Early findings from the CEC model demonstrate that a specialty accountable care organization model focused on a particular population was associated with reduced payments and improved quality of care. Future research can assess the longer-term outcomes of the CEC model and its applicability to populations with other complex chronic conditions.

Do Medicare Accountable Care Organizations Reduce Disparities After Spinal Fracture?

BACKGROUND: National changes in health care disparities within the setting of trauma care have not been examined within Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) or non-ACOs. We sought to examine the impact of ACOs on post-treatment outcomes (in-hospital mortality, 90-day complications, and readmissions), as well as surgical intervention among whites and nonwhites treated for spinal fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified all beneficiaries treated for spinal fractures between 2009 and 2014 using national Medicare fee for service claims data. Claims were used to identify sociodemographic and clinical criteria, receipt of surgery and in-hospital mortality, 90-day complications, and readmissions. Multivariable logistic regression analysis accounting for all confounders was used to determine the effect of race/ethnicity on outcomes. Nonwhites were compared with whites treated in non-ACOs between 2009 and 2011 as the referent. RESULTS: We identified 245,704 patients who were treated for spinal fractures. Two percent of the cohort received care in an ACO, whereas 7% were nonwhite. We found that disparities in the use of surgical fixation for spinal fractures were present in non-ACOs over the period 2009-2014 but did not exist in the context of care provided through ACOs (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44, 1.28). A disparity in the development of complications existed for nonwhites in non-ACOs (OR 1.09; 95% CI 1.01, 1.17) that was not encountered among nonwhites receiving care in ACOs (OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.90, 1.95). An existing disparity in readmission rates for nonwhites in ACOs over 2009-2011 (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.01, 1.80) was eliminated in the period 2012-2014 (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.65, 1.09). CONCLUSIONS: Our work reinforces the idea that ACOs could improve health care disparities among nonwhites. There is also the potential that as ACOs become more familiar with care integration and streamlined delivery of services, further improvements in disparities could be realized.

Can Cartoons Which Depict Autistic Characters Improve Attitudes Towards Autistic Peers?

This study aimed to assess the efficacy of two cartoons which depict autistic characters in improving attitudes towards autistic peers in two separate studies. Forty-six children participated in study 1 (4-7 years), and 47 children participated in study 2 (8-11 years). Both the conative (behavioural) component of attitudes and knowledge about autism were measured before and after the cartoon interventions. Knowledge of autism increased after watching the cartoons in both studies but attitudes to autism only improved in study 1. Knowledge was shown to correlate with change in some but not all attitude measures. The findings suggest that cartoons can improve attitudes to autism, but this may depend on how information is presented.

Rewarding Results: Texas Medicare ACOs Perform Promisingly.

For the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) and many of the accountable care organizations (ACOs) that participated in it, 2019 was billed as a transition year. But data released by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) in September show Texas ACOs fared quite well last year - and a number of Texas physicians and ACO officials say the savings generated are worth the gruntwork that MSSP requires.