ArticleThe American journal of managed care2016
Effects of physician payment reform on provision of home dialysis.
Article in The American journal of managed care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Financial Incentives to Facilities and Clinicians Treating Patients With End-stage Kidney Disease and Use of Home Dialysis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA health forum · 2022Trial
- Payment systems for dialysis and their effects: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Home Dialysis in the United States: A Roadmap for Increasing Peritoneal Dialysis Utilization.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2020Article
- Conflicts of interest in dialysis: A barrier to policy reforms.Seminars in dialysis · 2020Article
- Health Insurance and the Use of Peritoneal Dialysis in the United States.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2018Article
- A View of the Bundle from a Home Dialysis Perspective: Present at the Creation.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2018Article
- Home Dialysis in the Prospective Payment System Era.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2017Article
- Attitudes and Opinions of Canadian Nephrologists Toward Continuous Quality Improvement Options.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPatients with end-stage renal disease can receive dialysis at home or in-center. In 2004, CMS reformed physician payment for in-center hemodialysis care from a capitated to a tiered fee-for-service model, augmenting physician payment for frequent in-center visits. We evaluated whether payment reform influenced dialysis modality assignment. STUDY
designCohort study of patients starting dialysis in the United States in the 3 years before and the 3 years after payment reform.
methodsWe conducted difference-in-difference analyses comparing patients with traditional Medicare coverage (who were affected by the policy) to others with Medicare Advantage (who were unaffected by the policy). We also examined whether the policy had a more pronounced influence on dialysis modality assignment in areas with lower costs of traveling to dialysis facilities.
resultsPatients with traditional Medicare coverage experienced a 0.7% (95% CI, 0.2%-1.1%; P = .003) reduction in the absolute probability of home dialysis use following payment reform compared with patients with Medicare Advantage. Patients living in areas with larger dialysis facilities (where payment reform made in-center hemodialysis comparatively more lucrative for physicians) experienced a 0.9% (95% CI, 0.5%-1.4%; P < .001) reduction in home dialysis use following payment reform compared with patients living in areas with smaller facilities (where payment reform made in-center hemodialysis comparatively less lucrative for physicians).
conclusionsThe transition from a capitated to a tiered fee-for-service payment model for in-center hemodialysis care resulted in fewer patients receiving home dialysis. This area of policy failure highlights the importance of considering unintended consequences of future physician payment reform efforts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27355909PMC5055389What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.