Association of Participation in Medicare's Oncology Care Model With Spending, Utilization, and Quality Outcomes Among Commercially Insured and Medicare Advantage Members.

IF 42.1 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Journal of Clinical Oncology Pub Date : 2025-01-10 Epub Date: 2024-10-02 DOI:10.1200/JCO.24.00502
Samyukta Mullangi, Benjamin Ukert, Andrea Devries, David Debono, Jason Santos, Michael J Fisch, Stephen M Schleicher, Amol S Navathe, Justin E Bekelman, Aaron L Schwartz, Ravi B Parikh
{"title":"Association of Participation in Medicare's Oncology Care Model With Spending, Utilization, and Quality Outcomes Among Commercially Insured and Medicare Advantage Members.","authors":"Samyukta Mullangi, Benjamin Ukert, Andrea Devries, David Debono, Jason Santos, Michael J Fisch, Stephen M Schleicher, Amol S Navathe, Justin E Bekelman, Aaron L Schwartz, Ravi B Parikh","doi":"10.1200/JCO.24.00502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Oncology Care Model (OCM), a value-based payment model for traditional Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, yielded total spending reductions that were outweighed by incentive payments, resulting in net losses to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. We studied whether the OCM yielded spillover effects in total episode spending, utilization, and quality among commercially insured and Medicare Advantage (MA) members, who were not targeted by the program.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This observational study used administrative claims from a large national payer, yielding 157,189 total patients with commercial insurance or MA with solid malignancies who initiated 229,376 systemic anticancer therapy episodes before (2012-2015) and during (2016-2021) the OCM at 125 OCM-participating practices (a subset of total OCM practices) and a 1:10 propensity-matched set of 860 non-OCM practices. We used difference-in-differences analyses to assess the association between the OCM and total episode spending, defined as medical spending during a 6-month episode. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization and emergency department (ED) utilization and quality measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From the pre-OCM to the OCM period, mean total episode payments increased from $45,504 in US dollars (USD) to $46,239 USD for OCM-participating practices, and increased from $50,519 USD to $58,591 USD for non-OCM practices (adjusted difference-in-differences -$6,287 USD [95% CI, -$10,076 USD to -$2,498 USD], <i>P</i> = .001). The OCM was associated with adjusted spending decreases for both high-risk (-$6,756 USD [95% CI, -$10,731 USD to -$2,781 USD], <i>P</i> = .001) and low-risk (-$4,171 USD [95% CI, -$7,799 USD to -$543 USD], <i>P</i> = .025) episodes. OCM-associated spending reductions were strongest for outpatient (-$5,243 USD [95% CI, -$8,589 USD to -$1,897 USD], <i>P</i> = .002) and infused/injected anticancer drug (-$3,031 USD [95% CI, -$5,193 USD to -$869 USD], <i>P</i> = .006) spending. There were no associations between OCM participation and changes in hospital or ED utilization nor quality of care.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The OCM was associated with reductions in spending for nontargeted members, a spillover effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":15384,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"133-142"},"PeriodicalIF":42.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11708986/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.24.00502","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The Oncology Care Model (OCM), a value-based payment model for traditional Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, yielded total spending reductions that were outweighed by incentive payments, resulting in net losses to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. We studied whether the OCM yielded spillover effects in total episode spending, utilization, and quality among commercially insured and Medicare Advantage (MA) members, who were not targeted by the program.

Patients and methods: This observational study used administrative claims from a large national payer, yielding 157,189 total patients with commercial insurance or MA with solid malignancies who initiated 229,376 systemic anticancer therapy episodes before (2012-2015) and during (2016-2021) the OCM at 125 OCM-participating practices (a subset of total OCM practices) and a 1:10 propensity-matched set of 860 non-OCM practices. We used difference-in-differences analyses to assess the association between the OCM and total episode spending, defined as medical spending during a 6-month episode. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization and emergency department (ED) utilization and quality measures.

Results: From the pre-OCM to the OCM period, mean total episode payments increased from $45,504 in US dollars (USD) to $46,239 USD for OCM-participating practices, and increased from $50,519 USD to $58,591 USD for non-OCM practices (adjusted difference-in-differences -$6,287 USD [95% CI, -$10,076 USD to -$2,498 USD], P = .001). The OCM was associated with adjusted spending decreases for both high-risk (-$6,756 USD [95% CI, -$10,731 USD to -$2,781 USD], P = .001) and low-risk (-$4,171 USD [95% CI, -$7,799 USD to -$543 USD], P = .025) episodes. OCM-associated spending reductions were strongest for outpatient (-$5,243 USD [95% CI, -$8,589 USD to -$1,897 USD], P = .002) and infused/injected anticancer drug (-$3,031 USD [95% CI, -$5,193 USD to -$869 USD], P = .006) spending. There were no associations between OCM participation and changes in hospital or ED utilization nor quality of care.

Conclusion: The OCM was associated with reductions in spending for nontargeted members, a spillover effect.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
参与医疗保险肿瘤护理模式与商业保险和医疗保险优势会员的支出、使用和质量结果的关系。
目的:肿瘤护理模式(OCM)是针对传统医疗保险癌症受益人的一种基于价值的支付模式,其减少的总支出超过了奖励金,导致医疗保险与医疗补助服务中心(Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services)出现净亏损。我们研究了 OCM 是否对商业保险和医疗保险优势(MA)成员的总支出、利用率和质量产生了溢出效应,这些成员并不是该计划的目标群体:这项观察性研究使用了一家大型全国性支付机构的行政报销单,结果显示,在 OCM 实施前(2012-2015 年)和实施期间(2016-2021 年),共有 157,189 名患有实体恶性肿瘤的商业保险或医疗保险患者在 125 家参与 OCM 的医疗机构(OCM 总医疗机构的子集)和 860 家未参与 OCM 的医疗机构中进行了 229,376 次系统抗癌治疗。我们使用差异分析法来评估 OCM 与总病程支出(定义为 6 个月病程中的医疗支出)之间的关联。次要结果包括住院和急诊科(ED)利用率以及质量测量:从 OCM 前到 OCM 期间,参与 OCM 的医疗机构的平均医疗总支出从 45,504 美元增至 46,239 美元,未参与 OCM 的医疗机构的平均医疗总支出从 50,519 美元增至 58,591 美元(调整后的差异-6,287 美元[95% CI,-10,076 美元至-2,498 美元],P = .001)。OCM 与高风险(-6,756 美元 [95% CI,-10,731 美元至-2,781 美元],P = .001)和低风险(-4,171 美元 [95% CI,-7,799 美元至-543 美元],P = .025)病例的调整后支出减少相关。与 OCM 相关的支出减少最多的是门诊支出(-5,243 美元 [95% CI,-8,589 美元至-1,897 美元],P = .002)和输注/注射抗癌药物支出(-3,031 美元 [95% CI,-5,193 美元至-869 美元],P = .006)。参与 OCM 与医院或急诊室利用率的变化以及护理质量之间没有关联:结论:OCM 与非目标会员支出的减少有关,这是一种溢出效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Journal of Clinical Oncology 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
41.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
8215
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Oncology serves its readers as the single most credible, authoritative resource for disseminating significant clinical oncology research. In print and in electronic format, JCO strives to publish the highest quality articles dedicated to clinical research. Original Reports remain the focus of JCO, but this scientific communication is enhanced by appropriately selected Editorials, Commentaries, Reviews, and other work that relate to the care of patients with cancer.
期刊最新文献
Botensilimab (Fc-enhanced anti-cytotoxic lymphocyte-association protein-4 antibody) Plus Balstilimab (anti-PD-1 antibody) in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Metastatic Sarcomas. Elective Discontinuation of Larotrectinib in Pediatric Patients With TRK Fusion Sarcomas and Related Mesenchymal Tumors. Erratum: Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Induction or Consolidation Chemotherapy? Machine Learning to Predict Mortality in Older Patients With Cancer: Development and External Validation of the Geriatric Cancer Scoring System Using Two Large French Cohorts. Pertuzumab Retreatment for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Locally Advanced/Metastatic Breast Cancer (PRECIOUS Study): Final Overall Survival Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1