Dataset Information

Association of Patient Outcomes With Bundled Payments Among Hospitalized Patients Attributed to Accountable Care Organizations.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

It is unknown how outcomes are affected when patients receive care under bundled payment and accountable care organization (ACO) programs simultaneously.

Objective

To evaluate whether outcomes in the Medicare Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program differed depending on whether patients were attributed to ACOs in the Medicare Shared Savings Program.

Design setting and participants

This cohort study was conducted using Medicare claims data from January 1, 2011, to September 30, 2016, and difference-in-differences analysis to compare episode outcomes for patients admitted to BPCI vs non-BPCI hospitals. Outcomes were stratified for patients who were and were not attributed to an ACO. Participants included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries receiving care for medical and surgical episodes at US hospitals. Data were analyzed between October 1, 2018, and June 10, 2021.

Exposures

Hospitalization for any of the 48 episodes (24 medical, 24 surgical) included in the BPCI at US hospitals participating in the BPCI for those episodes.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was change in 90-day postdischarge institutional spending, and secondary outcomes included changes in quality and utilization.

Results

A total of 7 108 146 beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 76.9 [12.2] years; 4 101 081 women [58%]) received care for medical episodes, and 3 675 962 beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 74.8 [10.1] years; 2 074 921 women [56%]) received care for surgical episodes. Compared with patients who were not attributed to ACOs, the association between bundled payments and changes in postdischarge institutional spending was larger among patients attributed to ACOs (-$323 difference; 95% CI, -$607 to -$39; P = .03) for medical episodes, but not surgical episodes. Attribution to an ACO also increased the strength of the association between bundled payments and changes in 90-day readmissions for both medical episodes (-0.98 percentage point difference; 95% CI, -1.55 to -0.41; P = .001) and surgical episodes (-0.84 percentage point difference; 95% CI, -1.32 to -0.35; P = .001).

Conclusions and relevance

In this cohort study, compared with inclusion in bundled payments alone, simultaneous inclusion in both ACOs and bundled payment programs was associated with lower institutional postacute care spending and readmissions for medical episodes and lower readmissions but not spending for surgical episodes. Receiving care under models such as ACOs may improve episode outcomes under bundled payments.

SUBMITTER: Navathe AS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8796940 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of Patient Outcomes With Bundled Payments Among Hospitalized Patients Attributed to Accountable Care Organizations.

Navathe Amol S AS Liao Joshua M JM Wang Erkuan E Isidro Ulysses U Zhu Jingsan J Cousins Deborah S DS Werner Rachel M RM

JAMA health forum 20210820 8

<h4>Importance</h4>It is unknown how outcomes are affected when patients receive care under bundled payment and accountable care organization (ACO) programs simultaneously.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate whether outcomes in the Medicare Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program differed depending on whether patients were attributed to ACOs in the Medicare Shared Savings Program.<h4>Design setting and participants</h4>This cohort study was conducted using Medicare claims data from Januar ...[more]

PMID: 35977188

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAn increasing number of hospitals have participated in Medicare's bundled payment and accountable care organization (ACO) programs. Although participation in bundled payments has been associated with savings for lower-extremity joint replacement (LEJR) surgery, simultaneous participation in ACOs may be associated with different outcomes given the prevalence of LEJR among patients receiving care at ACO participant organizations and potential overlap in care redesign strategies adopted under the 2 payment models.ObjectiveTo examine whether simultaneous participation in a Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) ACO affects the association between hospitals' participation in LEJR episodes under the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative and patient outcomes compared with participation in the BPCI initiative alone.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study, conducted from January 1 to May 31, 2019, used 2011 to 2016 Medicare claims data and incorporated an instrumental variable with a difference-in-differences method among 483 008 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries undergoing LEJR surgery at 212 bundled payment participant hospitals, 105 coparticipant hospitals, and 1413 nonparticipant hospitals in the United States.ExposuresHospital participation in both the BPCI initiative and the MSSP (coparticipants), BPCI only (bundled payment participants), or neither (nonparticipants).Main outcomes and measuresChanges in clinical outcomes and mean LEJR episode spending.ResultsA total of 483 008 patients (mean [SD] age, 73.0 [8.4] years; 308 173 [63.8%] female) were included in the study. No differential changes were found in patient and hospital characteristics across participation groups. In adjusted analysis, coparticipants had 1.5% (95% CI, 0.7%-2.2%; P < .001) more unplanned readmissions than did bundled payment participants. Compared with bundled payment participants, coparticipants also had differentially greater decreases in hospital length of stay (adjusted difference-in-differences value, -5.3%; 95% CI, -7.1% to -3.5%; P < .001) and home health care use (adjusted difference-in-differences value, -3.4%; 95% CI, -4.5% to -2.3%; P < .001) and greater increases in postdischarge outpatient follow-up (adjusted difference-in-differences value, 2.1%; 95% CI, 0.9%-3.3%; P < .001). Coparticipants and bundled payment participants did not have differential changes in episode spending (adjusted difference-in-differences value, 0.4%; 95% CI, -0.7% to 1.6%; P = .46), although both groups had more decreased spending compared with nonparticipants.Conclusions and relevanceAmong bundled payment participants, coparticipation in ACOs was not associated with LEJR episode savings but was associated with differential changes in postacute care use patterns and unplanned readmissions. These findings support the longer-term benefits of LEJR bundles and suggest that coparticipants may adopt care redesign strategies that differ from hospitals with bundled payments only.

Project description:BackgroundThe growing movement toward more accountable care delivery and the increasing number of people with chronic illnesses underscores the need for primary care practices to engage patients in their own care.ObjectiveFor adult primary care practices seeing patients with diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease, we examined the relationship between selected practice characteristics, patient engagement, and patient-reported outcomes of care.DesignCross-sectional multilevel observational study of 16 randomly selected practices in two large accountable care organizations (ACOs).ParticipantsPatients with diabetes and/or cardiovascular disease (CVD) who met study eligibility criteria (n = 4368) and received care in 2014 were randomly selected to complete a patient activation and PRO survey (51% response rate; n = 2176). Primary care team members of the 16 practices completed surveys that assessed practice culture, relational coordination, and teamwork (86% response rate; n = 411).Main measuresPatient-reported outcomes included depression (PHQ-4), physical functioning (PROMIS SF12a), and social functioning (PROMIS SF8a), the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care instrument (PACIC-11), and the Patient Activation Measure instrument (PAM-13). Patient-level covariates included patient age, gender, education, insurance coverage, limited English language proficiency, blood pressure, HbA1c, LDL-cholesterol, and disease comorbidity burden. For each of the 16 practices, patient-centered culture and the degree of relational coordination among team members were measured using a clinician and staff survey. The implementation of shared decision-making activities in each practice was assessed using an operational leader survey.Key resultsHaving a patient-centered culture was positively associated with fewer depression symptoms (odds ratio [OR] = 1.51; confidence interval [CI] 1.04, 2.19) and better physical function scores (OR = 1.85; CI 1.25, 2.73). Patient activation was positively associated with fewer depression symptoms (OR = 2.26; CI 1.79, 2.86), better physical health (OR = 2.56; CI 2.00, 3.27), and better social health functioning (OR = 4.12; CI 3.21, 5.29). Patient activation (PAM-13) mediated the positive association between patients' experience of chronic illness care and each of the three patient-reported outcome measures-fewer depression symptoms, better physical health, and better social health. Relational coordination and shared decision-making activities reported by practices were not significantly associated with higher patient-reported outcome scores.ConclusionsDiabetic and CVD patients who received care from ACO-affiliated practices with more developed patient-centered cultures reported lower PHQ-4 depression symptom scores and better physical functioning. Diabetic and CVD patients who were more highly activated to participate in their care reported lower PHQ-4 scores and better physical and social outcomes of care.

Project description:ImportancePeople with complex needs account for a disproportionate amount of Medicare spending, partially because of fragmented care delivered across multiple practitioners and settings. Accountable care organization (ACO) contracts give practitioners incentives to improve care coordination to the extent that coordination initiatives reduce total spending or improve quality.ObjectiveTo assess the association between ACO-reported care management and coordination activities and quality, utilization, spending, and health care system interactions in older adults with complex needs.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cross-sectional study, survey information on care management and coordination processes from 244 Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs in the 2017-2018 National Survey of ACOs (of 351 Medicare ACO respondents; response rate, 69%) conducted from July 20, 2017, to February 15, 2018, was linked to 2016 Medicare administrative claims data. Medicare beneficiaries 66 years or older who were defined as having complex needs because of frailty or 2 or more chronic conditions associated with high costs and clinical need were included.ExposuresBeneficiary attribution to ACO reporting comprehensive (top tertile) care management and coordination activities.Main outcomes and measuresAll-cause prevention quality indicator admissions, 30-day all-cause readmissions, acute care and critical access hospital admissions, evaluation and management visits in ambulatory settings, inpatient days, emergency department visits, total spending, post-acute care spending, health care contact days, and continuity of care (from Medicare claims).ResultsAmong 1 402 582 Medicare beneficiaries with complex conditions, the mean (SD) age was 78 (8.0) years and 55.1% were female. Compared with beneficiaries assigned to ACOs in the bottom tertile of care management and coordination activities, those assigned to ACOs in the top tertile had identical median prevention quality indicator admissions and 30-day all-cause readmissions (0 per beneficiary across all tertiles), hospitalization and emergency department visits (1.0 per beneficiary in bottom and top tertiles), evaluation and management visits in ambulatory settings (14.0 per beneficiary [interquartile range (IQR), 8.0-21.0] in both tertiles), longer median inpatient days (11.0 [IQR, 4.0-33.0] vs 10.0 [IQR, 4.0-32.0]), higher median annual spending ($14 350 [IQR, $4876-$36 119] vs $14 229 [IQR, $4805-$36 268]), lower median health care contact days (28.0 [IQR, 17.0-44.0] vs 29.0 [IQR, 18.0-45.0]), and lower continuity-of-care index (0.12 [IQR, 0.08-0.20] vs 0.13 [IQR, 0.08-0.21]). Accounting for within-patient correlation, quality, utilization, and spending outcomes among patients with complex needs attributed to ACOs were not statistically different comparing the top vs bottom tertile of care management and coordination activities.Conclusions and relevanceThe ACO self-reports of care management and coordination capacity were not associated with differences in spending or measured outcomes for patients with complex needs. Future efforts to care for patients with complex needs should assess whether strategies found to be effective in other settings are being used, and if so, why they fail to meet expectations.

Project description:BackgroundInitial evaluations of the Pioneer and Shared Savings Programs have shown modest savings associated with care receipt in a Medicare accountable care organization (ACO). Whether these savings are affected by disease chronicity and the mechanisms through which they occur are unclear. In this context, we examined the association between Medicare ACO implementation and episode spending for 2 different cardiovascular conditions.Methods and resultsWe analyzed a 20% sample of national Medicare data, identifying fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥65 years admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or congestive heart failure (CHF) between January 2010 and October 2014. We distinguished admissions to hospitals participating in a Medicare ACO from those to hospitals that were not. We calculated 365-day, price-standardized episode spending made on behalf of these beneficiaries, differentiating between early (index admission to 90 days postdischarge) and late payments (91-365 days postdischarge). Using an interrupted time series design, we fit longitudinal multivariable models to estimate the association between hospital ACO participation and episode spending. Our study included 153 476 beneficiaries admitted for AMI to 401 ACO participating hospitals and 2597 nonparticipating hospitals and 260 420 beneficiaries admitted for CHF to 412 ACO participating hospitals and 2796 nonparticipating hospitals. On multivariable analysis, admission to an ACO participating hospital was not associated with changes in early episode spending (AMI, $95 per beneficiary; 95% CI, -$481 to $671; CHF, $158; 95% CI, -$290 to $605). However, it was associated with significant reductions in late episode spending for both cohorts (AMI, -$680; 95% CI, -$1348 to -$11; CHF, -$889; 95% CI, -$1465 to -$313).ConclusionsFor beneficiaries with AMI or CHF, admission to ACO participating hospitals was not associated with changes in early episode spending, but it was associated with significant savings during the late episode. ACO effects on late episode spending may complement other value-based payment reforms that target the early episode.

Project description:BackgroundAccountable care organizations (ACOs) were established to improve care and outcomes for beneficiaries requiring highly coordinated, complex care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between hospital ACO participation and the outcomes of major surgical oncology procedures.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries older than 65 years who were undergoing a major surgical resection for colorectal, bladder, esophageal, kidney, liver, ovarian, pancreatic, lung, or prostate cancer from 2011 through 2013. A difference-in-differences analysis was implemented to compare the postimplementation period (January 2013 through December 2013) with the baseline period (January 2011 through December 2012) to assess the impact of hospital ACO participation on 30-day mortality, complications, readmissions, and length of stay (LOS).ResultsAmong 384,519 patients undergoing major cancer surgery at 106 ACO hospitals and 2561 control hospitals, this study found a 30-day mortality rate of 3.4%, a readmission rate of 12.5%, a complication rate of 43.8%, and a prolonged LOS rate of 10.0% in control hospitals and similar rates in ACO hospitals. Secular trends were noted, with reductions in perioperative adverse events in control hospitals between the baseline and postimplementation periods: mortality (percentage-point reduction, 0.1%; P = .19), readmissions (percentage-point reduction, 0.4%; P = .001), complications (percentage-point reduction, 1.0%; P < .001), and prolonged LOS (percentage-point reduction, 1.1%; P < .001). After accounting for these secular trends, this study identified no significant effect of hospital participation in an ACO on the frequency of perioperative outcomes (difference-in-differences estimator P values, .24-.72).ConclusionsEarly hospital participation in the Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO program was not associated with greater reductions in adverse perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing major cancer surgery in comparison with control hospitals. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2739-2746. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Project description:ImportanceMedicare's Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) program, which ran from 2013 to 2018, was an important experiment in physician-focused alternative payment models. However, little is known about whether the program was associated with better quality or outcomes or lower costs.ObjectiveTo determine whether participation in BPCI among physician group practices was associated with advantageous or deleterious changes in costs or patient outcomes.Design setting and participantsThis cross-sectional study used 2013 to 2017 Medicare files and difference-in-differences (DID) models to compare the change over time in Medicare payments, patient selection, and clinical outcomes between 91 orthopedic groups in BPCI Model 2 and 169 propensity-matched controls for patients undergoing joint replacement. Analyses were performed between December 2019 and February 2021.ExposuresVoluntary participation in BPCI.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 90-day Medicare payments; secondary outcomes were patient selection (volume, comorbidities) and clinical outcomes (30-day and 90-day emergency department visits, readmissions, mortality, and healthy days at home).ResultsThere were 74 343 patient episodes in the baseline period and 102 790 during the intervention in BPCI practices, and 88 147 patient episodes in the baseline period and 120 253 during the intervention in control practices; 291 214 of 461 598 (63.1%) patients were women, and 419 619 (90.9%) were White. At baseline, mean episode payments among BPCI-participating practices were $18 257, which decreased to $15 320 during the intervention, while control practices decreased from $17 927 to $16 170 (DID, -$1180; 95% CI, -$1565 to -$795; P < .001). Savings were driven by a decrease in postacute care spending. There were no differential changes in volume or comorbidities. The BPCI practices increased the proportion of patients discharged home compared with controls (23.6% to 43.4% vs 22.2% to 31.8%; DID, 10.2% [95% CI, 6.2% to 14.1%]). There were no differential changes in 30-day or 90-day mortality rates or emergency department visits, but 30-day and 90-day readmission rates decreased more among BPCI practices than controls (90 days: 8.7% to 7.5% vs 8.9% to 8.7%; DID, -1.0% [95% CI, -1.4% to -0.5%]), and 90-day healthy days at home increased (BPCI, 82.9 to 84.8, vs controls, 83.1 to 84.4; DID, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4 to 0.8]).Conclusions and relevanceGroup practice participation in BPCI for joint replacement was associated with reduced Medicare payments and improvements in clinical outcomes.

Project description:ImportanceAccountable care organizations (ACOs) aim to control health expenditures while improving quality of care. Primary care has been emphasized as a means to reduce spending, but little is known about the implications of using specialists for achieving this ACO objective.ObjectiveTo examine the association between ACO-beneficiary office visits conducted by specialists and the cost and utilization outcomes of those visits.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study obtained data on 620 distinct ACOs from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations Public-Use Files from April 1, 2012, to September 30, 2017. Generalized estimating equation models were used for analysis of ACOs, adjusting for ACO-beneficiary health status, Medicare enrollment groups, ACO size, and proportion of participating specialists.ExposuresSpecialist encounter proportion, the percentage of office visits provided by a specialist, was categorized into 7 discrete groups: less than 35%, 35% to less than 40%, 40% to less than 45% (reference group), 45% to less than 50%, 50% to less than 55%, 55% to less than 60%, and 60% or greater.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was total expenditures (given in US dollars) per assigned beneficiary person-year. The secondary outcomes were total numbers of emergency department visits, hospital discharges, skilled nursing facility discharges, and magnetic resonance imaging orders.ResultsIn total, the data set included 1836 ACO-year (number of participation years per ACO) observations for 620 distinct ACOs. Those ACOs with a specialist encounter proportion of 40% to less than 45% had $1129 (95% CI, $445-$1814) lower per-beneficiary person-year spending than did ACOs in the lowest specialist encounter proportion group and had $752 (95% CI, $115-$1389) lower per-beneficiary person-year spending compared with ACOs in the highest specialist encounter proportion group. Monotonic decreases in emergency department visits, hospital discharges, and skilled nursing facility discharges were observed with increasing specialist encounter proportion. Conversely, monotonic increases in magnetic resonance imaging volume discharges were observed with increasing specialist encounter proportion.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that an ACO's ability to reduce spending may require sufficient involvement in care processes from specialists, who seem to complement the intrinsic primary care approach in ACOs.

Dataset Information

Association of Patient Outcomes With Bundled Payments Among Hospitalized Patients Attributed to Accountable Care Organizations.

Importance

Objective

Design setting and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Association of Patient Outcomes With Bundled Payments Among Hospitalized Patients Attributed to Accountable Care Organizations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets