Search

Recent value-based payment reforms in the U.S. called for empirical data on how primary care practices of varying characteristics fund their integrated behavioral health services. To describe payment strategies used by U.S. primary care practices to fund behavioral health integration and compare strategies between practices with and without hospital affiliation.Baseline data were used and collected from 44 practices participating in a cluster-randomized, pragmatic trial of behavioral health integration. Data included practice characteristics and payment strategies—fee-for-service payment, pay-for-performance incentives, grants, and graduate medical education funds. Descriptive and comparative analyses using Fisher's exact tests and independent T -tests were conducted. The sample had 26 (59.1%) hospital-affiliated (hospital/health system-owned, academic medical centers and hospital-affiliated practices) and 18 (40.9%) non-hospital-affiliated practices (community health centers/federally qualified health centers and privately-owned practices). Most practices (88.6%) received payments through fee-for-service; 63.6% received pay-for-performance incentives; 31.8% received grant funds. Collaborative Care Management billing (CPT) codes were used in six (13.6%) practices. Over half (53.8%) of hospital-affiliated practices funded their behavioral health services through fee-for-service and pay-for-performance incentives only, as opposed to two-thirds (66.7%) of non-hospital-affiliated practices required additional support from grants and/or general medical education funds. Primary care practices support behavioral health integration through diverse payment strategies. More hospital-affiliated practices compared to non-hospital-affiliated practices funded integrated behavioral health services through fee-for-service and pay-for-performance incentives. Practices without hospital affiliation relied on multiple funding streams including grants and/or general medical education funds, suggesting their approach to financial sustainment may be more precarious or challenging, compared to hospital-affiliated practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Screening rates for colorectal cancer (CRC) remain low, especially among certain populations. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) outreach initiated by U.S. health plans could reach underserved individuals, while solving CRC screening data and implementation challenges faced by health clinics. We report the models and motivations of two health insurance plans implementing a mailed FIT program for age-eligible U.S. Medicaid and Medicare populations. One health plan operates in a single state with ~220,000 enrollees; the other operates in multiple states with ~2 million enrollees. We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with key stakeholders and observed leadership and clinic staff planning during program development and implementation. Interviews were transcribed and coded using a content analysis approach; coded interview reports and meeting minutes were iteratively reviewed and summarized for themes. Between June and September 2016, nine participants were identified, and all agreed to the interview. Interviews revealed that organizational context was important to both organizations and helped shape program design. Both organizations were hoping this program would address barriers to their prior CRC screening improvement efforts and saw CRC screening as a priority. Despite similar motivations to participate in a mailed FIT intervention, contextual features of the health plans led them to develop distinct implementation models: a collaborative model using some health clinic staffing versus a centralized model operationalizing outreach primarily at the health plan. Data are not yet available on the models' effectiveness. Our findings might help inform the design of programs to deliver mailed FIT outreach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at high risk for adverse drug events related to medication dosing errors and prescriptions for relatively contraindicated medications, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).Objectives: To examine the scope of and variation in prescribing relatively contraindicated medications and medications above the recommended dose levels among patients with stage III/IV CKD in primary care practice.Methods: This is a cross-sectional descriptive study that used structured electronic health record data. The study participants were patients aged 18 years and older from three primary care clinics in a practice-based research network. Number/proportion of adult patients with stage III/IV CKD; proportion of these patients with at least one NSAID or other relatively contraindicated medication prescribed over 2 years.Results: Of the 7586 eligible adult patients, 4.9% had stage III/IV CKD; 46.6% of these 373 patients with stage III/IV CKD were prescribed at least one relatively contraindicated drug (acarbose, chlorpropamide, glyburide, nitrofurantoin or any NSAID) during the 2-year study period; and 34.0% of patients with stage III/IV CKD were prescribed NSAIDs.Conclusions: Primary care patients with stage III/IV CKD were frequently prescribed or had documented use of relatively contraindicated drugs and thus were at risk of adverse drug events. Given the significant number of individuals with CKD in the USA, research that examines rates of adverse events related to these prescriptions and that tests primary care-based interventions to decrease inappropriate prescribing of relatively contraindicated medications to these patients is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ambulatory care sensitive hospitalizations (ACSHs) are commonly used as measures of access to and quality of care. They are defined as hospitalizations for certain acute and chronic conditions; yet, they are most commonly used in analyses comparing different groups without adjustment for individual-level comorbidity. We present an exploration of their roles in predicting ACSHs for acute and chronic conditions. Methods: Using 1998–99 US Medicare claims for 1 06 930 SEER-Medicare control subjects and 1999 Area Resource File data, we modelled occurrence of acute and chronic ACSHs with logistic regression, examining effects of different predictors on model discriminatory power. Results: Flags for the presence of a few comorbid conditions—congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, hypertension and, for acute ACSHs, dementia—contributed virtually all of the discriminative ability for predicting ACSHs. C-statistics were up to 0.96 for models predicting chronic ACSHs and up to 0.87 for predicting acute ACSHs. C-statistics for models lacking comorbidity flags were lower, at best 0.73, for both acute and chronic ACSHs. Conclusion: Comorbidity is far more important in predicting ACSH risk than any other factor, both for acute and chronic ACSHs. Imputations about quality and access should not be made from analyses that do not control for presence of important comorbid conditions. Acute and chronic ACSHs differ enough that they should be modelled separately. Unaggregated models restricted to persons with the relevant diagnoses are most appropriate for chronic ACSHs. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background Black patients with rectal cancer are considerably less likely than white patients to receive adjuvant therapy. We examined the hypothesis that the lower treatment rate for blacks is due to underreferral to medical and radiation oncologists. Methods We used 1992-1999 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data to identify elderly (≥66 years of age) patients who had been hospitalized for resection of stage II or Ill rectal cancer (n = 2716). We used χ² tests to examine associations between race and 1) consultation with an oncologist and 2) receipt of adjuvant therapy. We then used logistic regression to analyze the influence of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics (age at diagnosis, sex, marital status, median income and education in area of residence, comorbidity, and cancer stage) on black-white differences in the receipt of adjuvant therapy. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results There was no statistically significant difference between the 134 black patients and the 2582 white patients in the frequency of consultation with a medical oncologist (73.1% for blacks vs 74.9% for whites, difference = 1.8%, 95% confidence interval [Cl] = -5.9% to 9.5%, P = .64) or radiation oncologist (56.7% vs 64.8%, difference = 8.1%, 95% Cl = -0.5% to 16.7%, P = .06), but blacks were less likely than whites to consult with both a medical oncologist and a radiation oncologist (49.2% vs 58.8%, difference = 9.6%, 95% Cl = 0.9% to 18.2%, P = .03). Among patients who saw an oncologist, black patients were less likely than white patients to receive chemotherapy (54.1% vs 70.2%, difference = 16.1%, 95% Cl = 6.0% to 26.2%, P= .006), radiation therapy (73.7% vs 83.4%, difference = 9.7%, 95% Cl = 0.4% to 19.8%, P = .06), or both (60.6% vs 76.9%, difference = 16.3%, 95% Cl = 4.3% to 28.3%, P= .008). Patient and provider characteristics had minimal influence on the racial disparity in the use of adjuvant therapy. Conclusion Racial differences in oncologist consultation rates do not explain disparities in the use of adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer. A better understanding of patient preferences, patient-provider interactions, and potential influences on provider decision making is necessary to develop strategies to increase the use of adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer among black patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Certain factors, such as race or age, are known to be associated with variation in initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer, but little is known about what factors are associated with completion of adjuvant therapy. To determine whether predictors of initiation also predict completion, we analyzed Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program data linked to Medicare claims. We investigated mortality as a means to testing the validity of the completion measure that we created. Methods: We studied 3193 stage III colon cancer patients whose diagnosis was recorded in 1992–1996 SEER program data linked to 1991–1998 Medicare claims and who initiated adjuvant chemotherapy after colon cancer resection. We defined a measure of adjuvant chemotherapy completion as one chemotherapy administration claim in a month. We tested the validity of the created measure and its relation to 3-year cancer mortality adjusted for demographic, clinical, and environmental variables. We explored the association of patient characteristics and treating physician characteristics with chemotherapy completion by use of multivariable logistic regression modeling. Results: Of the 3193 patients, 2497 (78.2%) completed the course. Risk of cancer-related mortality was statistically significantly lower among those completing chemotherapy (relative risk = 0.79, 95% confidence interval = 0.69 to 0.89) than those with no adjuvant therapy. Patients who were female, widowed, increasingly elderly, rehospitalized, and living in certain regions were less likely to complete adjuvant chemotherapy than other patients. Race and other clinical, environmental, and physician characteristics were not associated with completion of therapy. Conclusions: Factors associated with incomplete adjuvant chemotherapy may represent physical frailty, treatment complications, and lack of social and psychological support. Interventions to mitigate these influences are a logical next step toward increasing chemotherapy completion rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Black-white disparities exist in receipt of recommended medical care, including colorectal cancer treatment. This retrospective cohort study examines the degree to which health systems (e.g., physician, hospital) factors explain black-white disparities in colon cancer care. Methods: Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; Medicare claims; the American Medical Association Masterfile; and hospital surveys were linked to examine chemotherapy receipt after stage III colon cancer resection among 5294 elderly (⩾66 years of age) black and white Medicare-insured patients. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with black-white differences in chemotherapy use. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Black and white patients were equally likely to consult with a medical oncologist, but among patients who had such a consultation, black patients were less likely than white patients (59.3% versus 70.4%, difference = 10.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.1% to 16.4%, P<.001) to receive chemotherapy. This black-white disparity was highest among patients aged 66-70 years (black patients 65.7%, white patients 86.3%, difference = 20.6%, 95% CI = 10.7% to 30.4%, P<.001) and decreased with age. The disparity among patients aged 66-70 years also remained statistically significant in the regression analysis. Overall, patient, physician, hospital, and environmental factors accounted for approximately 50% of the disparity in chemotherapy receipt among patients aged 66-70 years; surgical length of stay and neighborhood socioeconomic status accounted for approximately 27% of the disparity in this age group, and health systems factors accounted for 12%. Conclusions: Black and white Medicare-insured colon cancer patients have an equal opportunity to learn about adjuvant chemotherapy from a medical oncologist but do not receive chemotherapy equally. Little disparity was explained by health systems; more was explained by illness severity, social support, and environment. Further qualitative research is needed to understand the factors that influence the lower receipt of chemotherapy by black patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on residual treatment disparities after oncology referral for colorectal cancer. It states that a group of researchers identified that the inequalities between black and white patients in the use of adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer are most prevalent in younger patients. The methods employed by the authors in suggesting this observation are also discussed.