Search

Background: There are concerns about the capacity of rural primary care due to potential workforce shortages and patients with disproportionately more clinical and socioeconomic risks. Little research examines the configuration and delivery of primary care along the spectrum of rurality., Objective: Compare structure, capabilities, and payment reform participation of isolated, small town, micropolitan, and metropolitan physician practices, and the characteristics and utilization of their Medicare beneficiaries., Design: Observational study of practices defined using IQVIA OneKey, 2017 Medicare claims, and, for a subset, the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (response rate=47%)., Participants: A total of 27,716,967 beneficiaries with qualifying visits who were assigned to practices., Main Measures: We characterized practices' structure, capabilities, and payment reform participation and measured beneficiary utilization by rurality., Key Results: Rural practices were smaller, more primary care dominant, and system-owned, and had more beneficiaries per practice. Beneficiaries in rural practices were more likely to be from high-poverty areas and disabled. There were few differences in patterns of outpatient utilization and practices' care delivery capabilities. Isolated and micropolitan practices reported less engagement in quality-focused payment programs than metropolitan practices. Beneficiaries cared for in more rural settings received fewer recommended mammograms and had higher overall and condition-specific readmissions. Fewer beneficiaries with diabetes in rural practices had an eye exam. Most isolated rural beneficiaries traveled to more urban communities for care., Conclusions: While most isolated Medicare beneficiaries traveled to more urban practices for outpatient care, those receiving care in rural practices had similar outpatient and inpatient utilization to urban counterparts except for readmissions and quality metrics that rely on services outside of primary care. Rural practices reported similar care capabilities to urban practices, suggesting that despite differences in workforce and demographics, rural patterns of primary care delivery are comparable to urban., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: To measure geographic variation in rates of apical support procedures for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) among female Medicare beneficiaries., Methods: We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study and used 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify a cohort of women aged 65-99 years who had an apical support procedure, defined by Current Procedural Terminology codes, in 2016-2018. We included all vaginal and abdominal approaches (native tissue and mesh colpopexies) and obliterative procedures. We excluded vaginectomies with a diagnosis of gynecologic cancer that did not have a diagnosis for prolapse. We created rates of apical POP procedures by hospital referral region and computed coefficients of variation to measure the degree of geographic variation., Results: An average of 26,005 apical POP procedures were performed annually from 2016 to 2018. The majority of patients were aged 65-74 years (64.3%), and 28.5% had concomitant hysterectomy. From 2016 to 2018, there was a mean of 1.79 apical POP procedures per 1,000 female beneficiaries performed across hospital referral regions (95% CI 1.74-1.84). Rate estimates ranged between 0.87 (95% CI 0.63-1.11) apical POP procedures per 1,000 female beneficiaries (Alexandria, Louisiana) and 3.33 (95% CI 2.91-3.74) per 1,000 beneficiaries (Akron, Ohio), a nearly fourfold difference in rates. Variation between hospital referral regions for abdominal apical prolapse procedures was the greatest (coefficient of variation 0.52). Vaginal and obliterative approaches demonstrated less variation between hospital referral regions (respectively, coefficient of variation 0.36 and 0.40)., Conclusion: There is wide geographic variation among hospital referral regions for the treatment of POP. Women may be treated differently based on where they live and seek care, which raises questions about possible overuse in some regions and concerns about underuse and lack of access in other regions., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure Jonathan Skinner received consulting income from Sutter Health, the Eurasia Group and the Ministry of Health of Singapore. He received a speaking fee from the Quality Cancer Care Alliance. Kris Strohbehn disclosed that Reia, LLC, has provided their institution support for their efforts researching a novel pessary. Reia, LLC, has funding from National Institutes of Health SBIR/NICHD Grant: 2R44HD097809-02. He is the Chief Editor for the Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery section 12 of WebMD eMedicine and has received a small honorarium. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There are concerns about the capacity of rural primary care due to potential workforce shortages and patients with disproportionately more clinical and socioeconomic risks. Little research examines the configuration and delivery of primary care along the spectrum of rurality. Objective: Compare structure, capabilities, and payment reform participation of isolated, small town, micropolitan, and metropolitan physician practices, and the characteristics and utilization of their Medicare beneficiaries. Design: Observational study of practices defined using IQVIA OneKey, 2017 Medicare claims, and, for a subset, the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (response rate=47%). Participants: A total of 27,716,967 beneficiaries with qualifying visits who were assigned to practices. Main Measures: We characterized practices' structure, capabilities, and payment reform participation and measured beneficiary utilization by rurality. Key Results: Rural practices were smaller, more primary care dominant, and system-owned, and had more beneficiaries per practice. Beneficiaries in rural practices were more likely to be from high-poverty areas and disabled. There were few differences in patterns of outpatient utilization and practices' care delivery capabilities. Isolated and micropolitan practices reported less engagement in quality-focused payment programs than metropolitan practices. Beneficiaries cared for in more rural settings received fewer recommended mammograms and had higher overall and condition-specific readmissions. Fewer beneficiaries with diabetes in rural practices had an eye exam. Most isolated rural beneficiaries traveled to more urban communities for care. Conclusions: While most isolated Medicare beneficiaries traveled to more urban practices for outpatient care, those receiving care in rural practices had similar outpatient and inpatient utilization to urban counterparts except for readmissions and quality metrics that rely on services outside of primary care. Rural practices reported similar care capabilities to urban practices, suggesting that despite differences in workforce and demographics, rural patterns of primary care delivery are comparable to urban. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Serious mental illness (SMI) is a major source of suffering among Medicare beneficiaries. To date, limited evidence exists evaluating whether Medicare accountable care organizations (ACOs) are associated with decreased spending among people with SMI. Using national Medicare data from the period 2009-17, we performed difference-in-differences analyses evaluating changes in spending and use associated with enrollment in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) among beneficiaries with SMI. After five years, participation in MSSP ACOs was associated with small savings for beneficiaries with SMI (-$233 per person per year) in total health care spending, primarily related to savings from chronic medical conditions (excluding mental health; -$227 per person per year) and not from savings related to mental health services (-$6 per person per year). Savings were driven by reductions in acute and postacute care for medical conditions. Further work is needed to ensure that Medicare ACOs invest in strategies to reduce potentially unnecessary care related to mental health disorders and to improve health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]