Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28192568›Full record

ArticleJAMA internal medicine2017

Early Performance in Medicaid Accountable Care Organizations: A Comparison of Oregon and Colorado.

K John McConnell, Stephanie Renfro, Benjamin K S Chan, Thomas H A Meath, Aaron Mendelson, Deborah Cohen, Jeanette Waxmonsky, Dennis McCarty, Neal Wallace, Richard C Lindrooth

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

K John McConnellCenter for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Stephanie RenfroCenter for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Benjamin K S ChanCenter for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Thomas H A MeathCenter for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Aaron MendelsonCenter for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Deborah CohenDepartment of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Jeanette WaxmonskyJefferson Center for Mental Health, Office of Healthcare Transformation, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
Dennis McCartyOHSU-PSU School of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
Neal WallaceHatfield School of Government, Portland State University, Portland.
Richard C LindroothDepartment of Health Systems, Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Denver.

Funding

Oregon's Coordinated Care Organizations Integrate Care for Drug Use DisordersR33DA035640 · NIDA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI LIND, BONNIE · 2014 to 2017
$2.4M
Evaluating Coordinated Care OrganizationsR01MH100001 · NIMH · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI LINDROOTH, RICHARD C., MCCONNELL, KENNETH JOHN · 2012 to 2015
$2.2M
NIDA NIH HHS R33 DA035640NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH100001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Several state Medicaid reforms are under way, but the relative performance of different approaches is unclear. Objective: To compare the performance of Oregon's and Colorado's Medicaid Accountable Care Organization (ACO) models. Design, Setting, and Participants: Oregon initiated its Medicaid transformation in 2012, supported by a $1.9 billion investment from the federal government, moving most Medicaid enrollees into 16 Coordinated Care Organizations, which managed care within a global budget. Colorado initiated its Medicaid Accountable Care Collaborative in 2011, creating 7 Regional Care Collaborative Organizations that received funding to coordinate care with providers and connect Medicaid enrollees with community services. Data spanning July 1, 2010, through December 31, 2014 (18 months before intervention and 24 months after intervention, treating 2012 as a transition year) were analyzed for 452 371 Oregon and 330 511 Colorado Medicaid enrollees, assessing changes in outcomes using difference-in-differences analyses of regional focus, primary care homes, and care coordination. Oregon's Coordinated Care Organization model was more comprehensive in its reform goals and in the imposition of downside financial risk. Exposures: Regional focus, primary care homes, and care coordination in Medicaid ACOs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Performance on claims-based measures of standardized expenditures and utilization for selected services, access, preventable hospitalizations, and appropriateness of care. Results: In a total of 782 882 Medicaid enrollees, 45.0% were male, with mean (SD) age 16.74 (14.41) years. Standardized expenditures for selected services declined in both states during the 2010-2014 period, but these decreases were not significantly different between the 2 states. Oregon's model was associated with reductions in emergency department visits (-6.28 per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -10.51 to -2.05) and primary care visits (-15.09 visits per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -26.57 to -3.61), improvements in acute preventable hospital admissions (-1.01 admissions per 1000 beneficiary-months; 95% CI, -1.61 to -0.42), 3 of 4 measures of access (well-child visits, ages 3-6 years, 2.69%; 95% CI, 1.20% to 4.19%; adolescent well-care visits, 6.77%; 95% CI, 5.22% to 8.32%; and adult access to preventive ambulatory care, 1.26%; 95% CI, 0.28% to 2.25%), and 1 of 4 measures of appropriateness of care (avoidance of head imaging for uncomplicated headache, 2.59%; 95% CI, 1.35% to 3.83%). Conclusions and Relevance: Two years into implementation, Oregon's and Colorado's Medicaid ACO models exhibited similar performance on standardized expenditures for selected services. Oregon's model, marked by a large federal investment and movement to global budgets, was associated with improvements in some measures of utilization, access, and quality, but Colorado's model paralleled Oregon's on several other metrics.

Indexed as

Accountable Care OrganizationsHealth ServicesManaged Care ProgramsMedicaidAdolescentAdultChildColoradoEfficiency, OrganizationalFemaleFinancing, GovernmentHealth ExpendituresHumansMaleModels, OrganizationalOregon

Identifiers

PMID28192568
PMCPMC5440252

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.