Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30476951›Full record

ArticleJAMA internal medicine2019

Association of Team-Based Primary Care With Health Care Utilization and Costs Among Chronically Ill Patients.

David J Meyers, Alyna T Chien, Kevin H Nguyen, Zhonghe Li, Sara J Singer, Meredith B Rosenthal

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA internal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  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. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David J MeyersDepartment of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Alyna T ChienDepartment of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Division of General Pediatrics, Department of Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kevin H NguyenDepartment of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Zhonghe LiDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sara J SingerDepartment of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Meredith B RosenthalDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Harvard University · USBrown University · USStanford University · US

Funding

National Research Service AwardT32HS000011 · AHRQ · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI TRIVEDI, AMAL N. · 1986 to 2024
$6.1M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS000011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Empirical study findings to date are mixed on the association between team-based primary care initiatives and health care use and costs for Medicaid and commercially insured patients, especially those with multiple chronic conditions. Objective: To evaluate the association of establishing team-based primary care with patient health care use and costs. Design, Setting, and Participants: We used difference-in-differences to compare preutilization and postutilization rates between intervention and comparison practices with inverse probability weighting to balance observable differences. We fit a linear model using generalized estimating equations to adjust for clustering at 18 academically affiliated primary care practices in the Boston, Massachusetts, area between 2011 and 2015. The study included 83 953 patients accounting for 138 113 patient-years across 18 intervention practices and 238 455 patients accounting for 401 573 patient-years across 76 comparison practices. Data were analyzed between April and August 2018. Exposures: Practices participated in a 4-year learning collaborative that created and supported team-based primary care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outpatient visits, hospitalizations, emergency department visits, ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations, ambulatory care-sensitive emergency department visits, and total costs of care. Results: Of 322 408 participants, 176 259 (54.7%) were female; 64 030 (19.9%) were younger than 18 years and 258 378 (80.1%) were age 19 to 64 years. Intervention practices had fewer participants, with 2 or more chronic conditions (n = 51 155 [37.0%] vs n = 186 954 [46.6%]), more participants younger than 18 years (n = 337 931 [27.5%] vs n = 74 691 [18.6%]), higher Medicaid enrollment (n = 39 541 [28.6%] vs n = 81 417 [20.3%]), and similar sex distributions (75 023 women [54.4%] vs 220 097 women [54.8%]); however, after inverse probability weighting, observable patient characteristics were well balanced. Intervention practices had higher utilization in the preperiod. Patients in intervention practices experienced a 7.4% increase in annual outpatient visits relative to baseline (95% CI, 3.5%-11.3%; P < .001) after adjusting for patient age, sex, comorbidity, zip code level sociodemographic characteristics, clinician characteristics, and plan fixed effects. In a subsample of patients with 2 or more chronic conditions, there was a statistically significant 18.6% reduction in hospitalizations (95% CI, 1.5%-33.0%; P = .03), 25.2% reduction in emergency department visits (95% CI, 6.6%-44.0%; P = .007), and a 36.7% reduction in ambulatory care-sensitive emergency department visits (95% CI, 9.2%-64.0%; P = .009). Among patients with less than 2 comorbidities, there was an increase in outpatient visits (9.2%; 95% CI, 5.10%-13.10%; P < .001), hospitalizations (36.2%; 95% CI, 12.2-566.6; P = .003), and ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations (50.6%; 95% CI, 7.1%-329.2%; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: While establishing team-based care was not associated with differences in the full patient sample, there were substantial reductions in utilization among a subset of chronically ill patients. Team-based care practice transformation in primary care settings may be a valuable tool in improving the care of sicker patients, thereby reducing avoidable use; however, it may lead to greater use among healthier patients.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultChronic DiseaseCosts and Cost AnalysisEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMassachusettsMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Care TeamPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID30476951
PMCPMC6583420
OpenAlexW2902083872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.