ArticleThe New England journal of medicine2019
Two-Year Evaluation of Mandatory Bundled Payments for Joint Replacement.
Article in The New England journal of medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 126 papers.
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
126 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model on patient-reported outcomes.Health services research · 2022Trial
- Inspiratory Muscle Training Before Total Joint Arthroplasty to Improve Postoperative Outcomes: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Participants in Medicare's New Mandatory Bundled Payment Program.Population health management · 2026Article
- Impact of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model on Spending and Care Endpoints: A Systematic Review.The Journal of arthroplasty · 2026Review
- Article
- Prospective payment system transformation (2000-2024): temporal trends, payment architecture, and cross-national variation.Health economics review · 2026Review
- The impacts of public hospital compensation reform on the health workforce compensation and its structure: quasi-experimental evidence in China.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- The Oncology Care Model and Initiation of Systemic Therapy for Cancer.JAMA internal medicine · 2026Article
- Behavioral responses of healthcare providers to prospective payment systems: a systematic review using the WHO framework (2000-2024).Health economics review · 2026Review
- Parkinson's Disease Patients Face Higher 90-Day Readmission, Reoperation, and Infection Risk Following Total Knee Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Association of Hospitalist Co-management and Patient Outcomes with Patients Hospitalized for Hip Fracture.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of diagnosis-related group-based bundled payment on hospitalization costs and clinical outcomes in total hip arthroplasty: an interrupted time series analysis from Wenzhou, China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Micro-Strain Responsive Near-Infrared Mechanoluminescence for Potential Nondestructive Artificial Joint Stress Imaging.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Article
- Physicians' perspectives on the government-led first action plan for healthcare reform: the medical payment system in South Korea.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- The effect of a total hip arthroplasty bundled payment program on perioperative smoking and obesity.Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013) · 2025Article
- Does DRG-based payment lead to unintended effects on care quality? A case under global budget with price adjustment in China.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Difference-in-Differences for Health Policy and Practice: A Review of Modern Methods.Statistics in medicine · 2025Review
- Multimodal machine learning for risk-stratified bundled payments in spinal surgery.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Perioperative Costs of Elective Surgical Procedures in Medicare Advantage Compared With Traditional Medicare.JAMA health forum · 2025Article
- Savings Associated With Bundled Payments for Outpatient Spine Surgery Among Medicare Beneficiaries.JAMA health forum · 2025Article
66 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2016, Medicare implemented Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR), a national mandatory bundled-payment model for hip or knee replacement in randomly selected metropolitan statistical areas. Hospitals in such areas receive bonuses or pay penalties based on Medicare spending per hip- or knee-replacement episode (defined as the hospitalization plus 90 days after discharge).
methodsWe conducted difference-in-differences analyses using Medicare claims from 2015 through 2017, encompassing the first 2 years of bundled payments in the CJR program. We evaluated hip- or knee-replacement episodes in 75 metropolitan statistical areas randomly assigned to mandatory participation in the CJR program (bundled-payment metropolitan statistical areas, hereafter referred to as "treatment" areas) as compared with those in 121 control areas, before and after implementation of the CJR model. The primary outcomes were institutional spending per hip- or knee-replacement episode (i.e., Medicare payments to institutions, primarily to hospitals and post-acute care facilities), rates of postsurgical complications, and the percentage of "high-risk" patients (i.e., patients for whom there was an elevated risk of spending - a measure of patient selection). Analyses were adjusted for the hospital and characteristics of the patients and procedures.
resultsFrom 2015 through 2017, there were 280,161 hip- or knee-replacement procedures in 803 hospitals in treatment areas and 377,278 procedures in 962 hospitals in control areas. After the initiation of the CJR model, there were greater decreases in institutional spending per joint-replacement episode in treatment areas than in control areas (differential change [i.e., the between-group difference in the change from the period before the CJR model], -$812, or a -3.1% differential decrease relative to the treatment-group baseline; P<0.001). The differential reduction was driven largely by a 5.9% relative decrease in the percentage of episodes in which patients were discharged to post-acute care facilities. The CJR program did not have a significant differential effect on the composite rate of complications (P=0.67) or on the percentage of joint-replacement procedures performed in high-risk patients (P=0.81).
conclusionsIn the first 2 years of the CJR program, there was a modest reduction in spending per hip- or knee-replacement episode, without an increase in rates of complications. (Funded by the Commonwealth Fund and the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health.).
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.