Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31157819›Full record

ArticleJAMA internal medicine2019

Evaluation of Economic and Clinical Outcomes Under Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Mandatory Bundled Payments for Joint Replacements.

Derek A Haas, Xiaoran Zhang, Robert S Kaplan, Zirui Song

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
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 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
22.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Including Pharmaceuticals in Bundled Payments.Applied health economics and health policy · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. VOLUNTARY REGULATION: EVIDENCE FROM MEDICARE PAYMENT REFORM.The quarterly journal of economics · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Derek A HaasAvant-garde Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Xiaoran ZhangAvant-garde Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Robert S KaplanHarvard Business School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Zirui SongDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Harvard University · US

Funding

Inequities in Health Outcomes in the Twenty-First Century: Understanding New Causes and the Impact of Delivery System Reforms on Health Care DisparitiesDP5OD024564 · OD · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI SONG, ZIRUI · 2017 to 2021
$2.1M
NIH HHS DP5 OD024564
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: In 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) launched its first mandatory bundled payment program, the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model, by randomizing metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) into the payment model. Objective: To evaluate changes in key economic and clinical outcomes associated with the CJR model. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective, national, population-based analysis of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries undergoing lower extremity joint replacement was conducted using 100% Medicare Part A data and 5% Medicare Part B data. Within an intention-to-treat framework, a difference-in-differences approach was used to compare Medicare spending, quality of care, volume of episodes, and patient selection in episodes of lower extremity joint replacements in the first 2 years of the program between propensity score-matched CJR and non-CJR hospitals (episodes initiated from April 1, 2016, through December 31, 2017, with the latter completed by March 31, 2018). Lower extremity joint replacement episodes in MSAs randomly assigned to the CJR model were compared with those in MSAs not assigned to the CJR model. Exposures: Random assignment of MSAs into the CJR model within prespecified strata. Main Outcomes and Measures: Spending and its components, quality of care, volume of episodes, and patient characteristics were the main outcomes. Results: After propensity score matching, there were 157 828 primary lower extremity joint replacement cases across 684 hospitals in the CJR (treatment) group (101 641 [64.4%] women; mean [SD] age, 72.8 [8.9] years) and 180 594 cases across 726 hospitals in the non-CJR (control) group (115 580 women [64.0%] women; mean [SD] age, 72.6 [8.8] years). The CJR was associated with a decrease of $582 per episode in Medicare Part A spending, a 2.5% savings on claims (95% CI, -$873 to -$290; P < .001) driven by a 5.5% decline in 90-day postacute care spending, concentrated in skilled nursing facilities (-4.5% change from baseline; 95% CI, -$460 to -$26; P = .03) and inpatient rehabilitation facilities (-22.9% change from baseline; 95% CI,-$497 to -$176; P < .001). Estimated savings on claims, while consistent with changes in practice patterns, may not have exceeded the reconciliation payments to hospitals reported by CMS to date. No significant changes in hospital length of stay, readmissions, complications, 30- or 90-day mortality, volume of episodes, or patient characteristics relative to control were found. Conclusions and Relevance: The CJR was associated with reduced Medicare Part A spending on claims over 2 years, largely through lower postacute spending. Mandatory bundled payments may serve as a useful model for policy efforts to change clinicians' and facilities' behavior without harming quality.

Indexed as

AgedArthroplasty, ReplacementFemaleHumansMaleMedical AssistanceMiddle AgedPatient Care BundlesRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID31157819
PMCPMC6547121
OpenAlexW2947915738

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.