医保ACO评价中政策性治疗效果的探讨。

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":"医保ACO评价中政策性治疗效果的探讨。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

目的:解释评估医疗保险和医疗补助创新中心(CMMI)问责制医疗组织(ACO)模式的主要挑战以及应对这些挑战的方法。研究设计:我们列举了挑战,从替代支付模式的概念开始,延伸到如果最初的评估表明该模式是成功的,就决定扩大该模式。面临的挑战包括提供者和代管商层面的流失、受益人的泄漏和溢出、参与先前的支付模式,以及共享储蓄和惩罚的决定因素。方法:我们解释了在评估自愿ACO模型与将ACO随机分配到治疗组的模型时所面临的挑战。我们还注意到在评估中使用的设计与后续扩大成功模型的计划之间的关系。结果:最佳研究设计与成功模型的扩大计划密不可分。关于流失、泄漏、溢出和参与过去的支付模式的决策可以改变干预对模型参与者的估计影响。结论:如果CMMI打算将模型提供给更大但相似的志愿者群体,那么基于自愿参与者的估计治疗效果可能是与政策最相关的参数。然而,如果放大后的人群与评估样本具有不同的特征,可能是由于强制性参与,那么评估者将需要采用适合观察数据的伪随机化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Searching for the policy-relevant treatment effect in Medicare's ACO evaluations.

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
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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