Searching for the policy-relevant treatment effect in Medicare's ACO evaluations.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Bryan E Dowd, Roger D Feldman, Woolton Lee, Kathleen Rowan, Shriram Parashuram, Katie White
{"title":"Searching for the policy-relevant treatment effect in Medicare's ACO evaluations.","authors":"Bryan E Dowd, Roger D Feldman, Woolton Lee, Kathleen Rowan, Shriram Parashuram, Katie White","doi":"10.37765/ajmc.2024.89647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To explain key challenges to evaluating Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) accountable care organization (ACO) models and ways to address those challenges.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We enumerate the challenges, beginning with the conception of the alternative payment model and extending through the decision to scale up the model should the initial evaluation suggest that the model is successful. The challenges include churn at the provider and ACO levels, beneficiary leakage and spillover, participation in prior payment models, and determinants of shared savings and penalties.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We explain challenges posed in evaluations of voluntary ACO models vs models in which ACOs are randomly assigned to the treatment group. We also note the relationship between the design used in an evaluation and subsequent plans for scaling up successful models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The optimal research design is inextricably tied to the plans for scaling up a successful model. Decisions regarding churn, leakage, spillover, and participating in past payment models can alter the estimated effects of the intervention on participants in the model.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>If CMMI intends to offer the model to a larger, but similar, group of volunteers, then the estimated treatment effect based on voluntary participants may be the most policy-relevant parameter. However, if the scaled-up population has different characteristics than the evaluation sample, perhaps due to mandatory participation, then the evaluator will need to employ pseudo-randomization appropriate for observational data.</p>","PeriodicalId":50808,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Managed Care","volume":"30 Spec. No. 13","pages":"SP978-SP984"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Managed Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2024.89647","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To explain key challenges to evaluating Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) accountable care organization (ACO) models and ways to address those challenges.

Study design: We enumerate the challenges, beginning with the conception of the alternative payment model and extending through the decision to scale up the model should the initial evaluation suggest that the model is successful. The challenges include churn at the provider and ACO levels, beneficiary leakage and spillover, participation in prior payment models, and determinants of shared savings and penalties.

Methods: We explain challenges posed in evaluations of voluntary ACO models vs models in which ACOs are randomly assigned to the treatment group. We also note the relationship between the design used in an evaluation and subsequent plans for scaling up successful models.

Results: The optimal research design is inextricably tied to the plans for scaling up a successful model. Decisions regarding churn, leakage, spillover, and participating in past payment models can alter the estimated effects of the intervention on participants in the model.

Conclusions: If CMMI intends to offer the model to a larger, but similar, group of volunteers, then the estimated treatment effect based on voluntary participants may be the most policy-relevant parameter. However, if the scaled-up population has different characteristics than the evaluation sample, perhaps due to mandatory participation, then the evaluator will need to employ pseudo-randomization appropriate for observational data.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Managed Care
American Journal of Managed Care 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
177
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Managed Care is an independent, peer-reviewed publication dedicated to disseminating clinical information to managed care physicians, clinical decision makers, and other healthcare professionals. Its aim is to stimulate scientific communication in the ever-evolving field of managed care. The American Journal of Managed Care addresses a broad range of issues relevant to clinical decision making in a cost-constrained environment and examines the impact of clinical, management, and policy interventions and programs on healthcare and economic outcomes.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信