Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC, USA.
Mathematica Policy Research inc Cambridge Office, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Health Serv Res. 2024 Apr;59(2):e14284. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.14284. Epub 2024 Jan 29.
To test the reliability of Medicare claims in measuring vertical integration. We assess the accuracy of a commonly used measure of integration, primary care physician (PCP) practices billing Medicare as a hospital outpatient department (HOPD) in claims.
Medicare fee-for-service claims, IQVIA, and CPC+ practice surveys for this study.
We compare measures of integration from Medicare claims to self-reported indicators of integration from IQVIA and a survey of CPC+ participating practice sites.
DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We measure integration by using site-of-service billing in the 100% sample of Medicare Carrier claims from 2017-2020. In the IQVIA SK&A (2017-2018), OneKey (2019-2020), and practice survey data (2017-2019), we use self-reported responses to measure integration.
We find that currently most PCP practices sites that report themselves as being integrated with a health system do not bill as an HOPD. In 2017, 11% of CPC+ practices were identified as being vertically integrated in claims, while the equivalent numbers in SK&A and surveys were 52% and 54% integration, respectively. A t-test found that both datasets significantly differed from claims (Survey: 41.3%-45.1%; SK&A: 45.3%-51.1%); this gap persists in 2018-2019.
Measuring physician-hospital vertical integration accurately is integral to determining consolidation. The overwhelming majority of PCP practice sites not billing as an HOPD may reflect Medicare regulatory changes that have reduced the financial incentives for doing so. These findings have implications for researchers that study the growth in PCP-hospital integration in health care markets.
测试医疗保险索赔在衡量垂直整合方面的可靠性。我们评估了一种常用整合衡量指标的准确性,即初级保健医生(PCP)在索赔中向医疗保险计费作为医院门诊部门(HOPD)的做法。
本研究使用医疗保险服务收费制索赔、IQVIA 和 CPC+实践调查的数据。
我们将医疗保险索赔中的整合衡量指标与 IQVIA 和 CPC+参与实践站点调查中的自我报告整合指标进行比较。
数据收集/提取方法:我们通过使用 2017-2020 年 Medicare 承运人索赔的 100%样本中的服务地点计费来衡量整合度。在 IQVIA SK&A(2017-2018 年)、OneKey(2019-2020 年)和实践调查数据(2017-2019 年)中,我们使用自我报告的回应来衡量整合度。
我们发现,目前大多数报告与医疗系统整合的 PCP 实践站点并未作为 HOPD 计费。2017 年,有 11%的 CPC+实践被认定在索赔中是垂直整合的,而 SK&A 和调查中的相应数字分别为 52%和 54%。t 检验发现,两个数据集与索赔显著不同(调查:41.3%-45.1%;SK&A:45.3%-51.1%);这种差距在 2018-2019 年仍然存在。
准确衡量医生-医院的垂直整合对于确定整合程度至关重要。绝大多数不将 HOPD 计费的 PCP 实践站点可能反映了医疗保险监管变化,这些变化减少了这样做的经济激励。这些发现对研究医疗保健市场中 PCP-医院整合增长的研究人员具有影响。