ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2016
The CareFirst Patient-Centered Medical Home Program: Cost and Utilization Effects in Its First Three Years.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Value-Based Purchasing Design And Effect: A Systematic Review And Analysis.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2023Pooled it
- Impact of Healthcare Delivery System Type on Clinical, Utilization, and Cost Outcomes of Patient-Centered Medical Homes: a Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Pooled it
- The Comprehensive Primary Care Plus Model and Health Care Spending, Service Use, and Quality.JAMA · 2024Article
- Article
- The Medical Home Initiative in Italy: an Analysis of Changes in Healthcare Utilization.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of a Complex Care Program for High-Cost/High-Need Patients: a Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Provider Experiences with a Payer-Based PCMH Program.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Observational
- Payment Reform, Medication Use, and Costs: Can We Afford to Leave Out Drugs?Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Review
- Key Design Considerations When Calculating Cost Savings for Population Health Management Programs in an Observational Setting.Health services research · 2018Observational
- Maryland Multipayor Patient-centered Medical Home Program: A 4-Year Quasiexperimental Evaluation of Quality, Utilization, Patient Satisfaction, and Provider Perceptions.Medical care · 2018Article
- Association Between Extending CareFirst's Medical Home Program to Medicare Patients and Quality of Care, Utilization, and Spending.JAMA internal medicine · 2017Article
- Offsetting Patient-Centered Medical Homes Investment Costs Through Per-Member-Per-Month or Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System Incentive Payments.The Journal of ambulatory care managementArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnhanced primary care models have diffused slowly and shown uneven results. Because their structural features are costly and challenging for small practices to implement, they offer modest rewards for improved performance, and improvement takes time.
objectiveTo test whether a patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model that significantly rewarded cost savings and accommodated small primary care practices was associated with lower spending, fewer hospital admissions, and fewer emergency room visits.
designWe compared medical care expenditures and utilization among adults who participated in the PCMH program to adults who did not participate. We computed difference-in-difference estimates using two-part multivariate generalized linear models for expenditures and negative binomial models for utilization. Control variables included patient demographics, county, chronic condition indicators, and illness severity.
participantsA total of 1,433,297 adults aged 18-64 years, residing in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia, and insured by CareFirst for at least 3 consecutive months between 2010 and 2013.
interventionCareFirst implemented enhanced fee-for-service payments to the practices, offered a large retrospective bonus if annual cost and quality targets were exceeded, and provided information and care coordination support. MEASURES: Outcomes were quarterly claims expenditures per member for all covered services, inpatient care, emergency care, and prescription drugs, and quarterly inpatient admissions and emergency room visits.
resultsBy the third intervention year, annual adjusted total claims payments were $109 per participating member (95 % CI: -$192, -$27), or 2.8 % lower than before the program and compared to those who did not participate. Forty-two percent of the overall decline in spending was explained by lower inpatient care, emergency care, and prescription drug spending. Much of the reduction in inpatient and emergency spending was explained by lower utilization of services.
conclusionsA PCMH model that does not require practices to make infrastructure investments and that rewards cost savings can reduce spending and utilization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.