Search

Purpose: Despite evidence suggesting that high-quality primary care can prevent unnecessary hospitalizations, many primary care practices face challenges in achieving this goal, and there is little guidance identifying effective strategies for reducing hospitalization rates. We aimed to understand how practices in the Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+) program substantially reduced their acute hospitalization rate (AHR) over 2 years., Methods: We used Bayesian analyses to identify the CPC+ practice sites having the highest probability of achieving a substantial reduction in the adjusted Medicare AHR between 2016 and 2018 (referred to here as AHR high performers). We then conducted telephone interviews with 64 respondents at 14 AHR high-performer sites and undertook within- and cross-case comparative analysis., Results: The 14 AHR high performers experienced a 6% average decrease (range, 4% to 11%) in their Medicare AHR over the 2-year period. They credited various care delivery activities aligned with 3 strategies for reducing AHR: (1) improving and promoting prompt access to primary care, (2) identifying patients at high risk for hospitalization and addressing their needs with enhanced care management, and (3) expanding the breadth and depth of services offered at the practice site. They also identified facilitators of these strategies: enhanced payments through CPC+, prior primary care practice transformation experience, use of data to identify high-value activities for patient subgroups, teamwork, and organizational support for innovation., Conclusions: The AHR high performers observed that strengthening the local primary care infrastructure through practice-driven, targeted changes in access, care management, and comprehensiveness of care can meaningfully reduce acute hospitalizations. Other primary care practices taking on the challenging work of reducing hospitalizations can learn from CPC+ practices and may consider similar strategies, selecting activities that fit their context, personnel, patient population, and available resources., (© 2023 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.)

COVID-19 can lead to severe outcomes in children (1). Vaccination decreases risk for COVID-19 illness, severe disease, and death (2). On December 13, 2020, CDC recommended COVID-19 vaccination for persons aged ≥16 years, with expansion on May 12, 2021, to children and adolescents (children) aged 12-15 years, and on November 2, 2021, to children aged 5-11 years (3). As of March 8, 2023, COVID-19 vaccination coverage among school-aged children remained low nationwide, with 61.7% of children aged 12-17 years and approximately one third (32.7%) of those aged 5-11 years having completed the primary series (3). Intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination coverage vary by demographic characteristics, including race and ethnicity and socioeconomic status (4-6). Seattle Public Schools (SPS) implemented a program to increase COVID-19 vaccination coverage during the 2021-22 school year, focusing on children aged 5-11 years during November 2021-June 2022, with an added focus on populations with low vaccine coverage during January 2022-June 2022. † The program included strategic messaging, school-located vaccination clinics, and school-led community engagement. Vaccination data from the Washington State Immunization Information System (WAIIS) were analyzed to examine disparities in COVID-19 vaccination by demographic and school characteristics and trends over time. In December 2021, 56.5% of all SPS students, 33.7% of children aged 5-11 years, and 81.3% of children aged 12-18 years had completed a COVID-19 primary vaccination series. By June 2022, overall series completion had increased to 80.3% and was 74.0% and 86.6% among children aged 5-11 years and 12-18 years, respectively. School-led vaccination programs can leverage community partnerships and relationships with families to improve COVID-19 vaccine access and coverage., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Janet A. Englund reports institutional support from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, and Merck; consulting fees from Pfizer, Moderna, Abbvie, Merck, and AstraZeneca; and travel support to attend the 2022 European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases meeting from AstraZeneca. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

From 2012 to 2015, Sanford Health, a large health care system, integrated behavioral health services and chronic condition care management in some of its primary care practices in the Dakotas and rural Minnesota. Using difference-in-differences analyses for fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries attributed to 22 participating practices and 91 matched comparison practices, we found that the program increased the receipt of four recommended diabetes care processes by 8.6% (p=.048) and, by slowing the increase in emergency department (ED) visits, reduced them by 4.9% (p=.07) relative to the comparison group. However, the findings are mixed: the program did not affect hospital admissions, readmissions, or Medicare spending. In addition, the program increased admissions for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions by 13.6% (p=.07) relative to the comparison group. Sanford's program provides a concrete example of how to incorporate behavioral health services in primary care in underserved areas with some positive results on quality-of-care processes and ED utilization.

Background: The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) tests new models of paying for or delivering health care services and expands models that improve health outcomes while lowering medical spending. CMMI gave TransforMED, a national learning and dissemination contractor, a 3-year Health Care Innovation Award (HCIA) to integrate health information technology systems into physician practices. This paper estimates impacts of TransforMED's HCIA-funded program on patient outcomes and Medicare parts A and B spending., Research Design: We compared outcomes for Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries served by 87 treatment practices to outcomes for Medicare FFS beneficiaries served by 286 matched comparison practices, adjusting for differences in outcomes between the 2 groups during a 1-year baseline period. We estimated impacts in 3 evaluation outcome domains: quality-of-care processes, service use, and spending., Results: We estimated the program led to a 7.1% reduction in inpatient admissions and a 5.7% decrease in the outpatient emergency department visits. However, there was no evidence of statistically significant effects in outcomes in either the quality-of-care processes or spending domains., Conclusions: These results indicate that TransforMED's program reduced service use for Medicare FFS beneficiaries, but also show that the program did not have statistically significant favorable impacts in the quality-of-care processes or spending domains. These results suggest that providing practices with population health management and cost-reporting software-along with technical assistance for how to use them-can complement practices' own patient-centered medical home transformation efforts and add meaningfully to their impacts on service use.

Objectives: We investigated how access to and continuity of care might be affected by transitions between health insurance coverage sources, including the Marketplace (also called the Exchange), Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)., Methods: From January to February 2014 and from August to September 2014, we searched provider directories for networks of primary care physicians and selected pediatric specialists participating in Marketplace, Medicaid, and CHIP in 6 market areas of the United States and calculated the degree to which networks overlapped., Results: Networks of physicians in Medicaid and CHIP were nearly identical, meaning transitions between those programs may not result in much physician disruption. This was not the case for Marketplace and Medicaid and CHIP networks., Conclusions: Transitions from the Marketplace to Medicaid or CHIP may result in different degrees of physician disruption for consumers depending on where they live and what type of Marketplace product they purchase.

Tennessee created TennCare in 1994 to address the needs of "poor and uninsured citizens ... excluded from the health care system." Under TennCare, Tennessee implemented managed care in its Medicaid program and used savings anticipated from the switch to expand insurance coverage to uninsured and uninsurable adults and children. Our analysis of the expansion suggests that it improved access to care, reduced unmet need, and encouraged use of preventive services, particularly for children. These changes coincided with higher levels of satisfaction with care among TennCare beneficiaries.

This article reviews the experiences of federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Tennessee before and after Medicaid managed care demonstrations began. Adapting to managed care proved challenging, but all FQHCs survived. Overall, FQHCs performed better financially than anticipated, partly because demonstrations expanded coverage to previously uninsured individuals, and because FQHCs in two States formed plans that paid FQHCs more than other plans. Service encounters declined; it is unclear if this is negative, since it may indicate more efficient care delivery. In some cases, supportive State policies aided FQHCs' survival. Continued adaptation is critical for FQHCs' longer term prospects.

This article reviews Federal and State oversight of section 1115 Medicaid managed care demonstrations in Hawaii, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, and Tennessee from 1994 to 1998. Under Medicaid managed care, the Federal Government and States have had to shift their focus and resources into oversight functions that barely existed in fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid. We find that managed care monitoring was slow to begin and not always adequate in these demonstrations. While State and Federal monitoring have improved over time, monitoring is not yet at the point of ensuring access and quality.

This paper reviews Tennessee's experience setting, monitoring, and updating capitation rates for Medicaid managed behavioral health care, and draws lessons from those experiences for other states. Our review of assumptions about four components of Tennessee's rate-setting process--data, benefit design, savings expectations, and processes for monitoring and updating rates--suggests that the initial rate established by Tennessee was inadequate, and its inadequacy resulted primarily from the way available information was used to set the rate, rather than from the method of rate setting selected. Tennessee's experiences illustrate how difficult rate setting is and illuminate several key lessons about the rate-setting process.

Interviews with state Medicaid officials reveal that although managed care programs have been implemented in rural areas, participation remains behind that of urban areas. Many states aim to create a statewide Medicaid managed care program and are struggling to overcome barriers that are greater in rural areas, including providers' resistance, lack of commercial managed care, and inadequate supply of providers. Many have modified contracting strategies and shown flexibility regarding interpretations of travel standards, twenty-four-hour coverage requirements, and primary care case management requirements, to implement programs in rural environments.