ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022
Practice Billing for Medicare Advance Care Planning Across the USA.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Documented follow-up to memory concerns reported at the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Palliative care impact on hospital utilization and trends among lung cancer admissions with a high risk of mortality in U.S. hospitals.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Utility of advance care planning billing codes: a cross-sectional analysis of U.S. hospitalists' documentation.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- A Quality Improvement Initiative for Inpatient Advance Care Planning.JAMA health forum · 2024Article
- Advance Care Planning (ACP) in Medicare Beneficiaries with Heart Failure.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Mid-Atlantic primary care providers' perception of barriers and facilitators to end-of-life conversation.Palliative care and social practice · 2024Article
- Structural Barriers to Well-grounded Advance Care Planning for the Seriously Ill: a Qualitative Study of Clinicians' and Administrators' Experiences During a Pragmatic Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of Advance Care Planning on the Hospitalization-Associated Utilization and Cost of Patients with Alzheimer's Disease-Related Disorders Receiving Primary Care via Telehealth in a Provider Shortage Area: A Quantitative Pre-Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- An age-friendly population health dashboard geolocating by clinical and social determinant needs.Health services research · 2023Article
- Actual vs Documented Advance Care Planning in a Primary Care Clinic.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMedicare introduced billing codes in 2016 to encourage clinicians to engage in advance care planning (ACP) and promote goal-concordantend-of-life care, but uptake has been modest. While prior research examined individual-level factors in ACP billing, organization-level factors associated with physician practices billing for ACP remain unknown.
objectiveExamine the role of practices in ACP billing.
designRetrospective cohort study analyzing 2016-2018 national Medicare data.
participantsA total of 53,926 practices with at least 10 attributed Medicare beneficiaries. MAIN MEASURES: Outcomes were practice-level ACP billing (any use by the practice) and ACP use rate by practice-attributed beneficiaries. Practice characteristics were number of beneficiaries attributed to the practice; percentage of beneficiaries by race, Medicare-Medicaid dual enrollment, sex, and age; practice size; and specialty mix. KEY
resultsFifteen percent of practices billed for ACP. In adjusted models, we found higher odds of ACP billing and higher ACP use rates among practices with more primary care physicians (billing AOR: 10.01, 95%CI: 8.81-11.38 for practices with 75-100% (vs 0) primary care physicians), and those serving more Medicare beneficiaries (billing AOR: 4.55, 95%CI 4.08-5.08 for practices with highest (vs lowest) quintile of beneficiaries), and larger shares of female beneficiaries (billing AOR: 3.06, 95% CI 2.01-4.67 for 75-100% (vs <25%) female ).
conclusionsSeveral years after Medicare introduced ACP reimbursements for physicians, relatively few practices bill for ACP. ACP billing was more likely in large practices with a greater percentage of primary care physicians. To increase ACP billing uptake, policymakers and health system leaders might target interventions to larger practices where a small number of physicians already bill for ACP and to specialty practices that serve as the primary source of care for seriously ill patients.
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.