Suppr超能文献

多支付方全风险模式对保障传统医疗保险受益人的初级保健可及性的影响。

Impact of a multi-payer full-risk model on preserving primary care access for traditional medicare beneficiaries.

作者信息

Kornitzer Benjamin S, Yao Aaron, Peikes Deborah N, Rao Karthik

机构信息

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, General Internal Medicine, New York, NY 10029, United States.

FastHSR, Glen Allen, VA 23059, United States.

出版信息

Health Aff Sch. 2025 Apr 30;3(5):qxaf093. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxaf093. eCollection 2025 May.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Amid growing primary care shortages and increased use of value-based care (VBC), we evaluated whether adopting a multipayer, full-risk VBC model for Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries-supported by an enablement organization-affected primary care providers' (PCPs) acceptance of new patients with TM insurance.

METHODS

Using a difference-in-differences analysis of 2019-2023 claims, we compared 2 groups of PCPs with at least 50 TM patients in their panels: 208 PCPs who received support to adopt a VBC model for TM and Medicare Advantage patients in 2022, and 3657 similar PCPs who maintained their existing payment models.Between the preadoption period and 2023, access to new patient visits for patients with TM insurance declined more for nonadopters than adopters.

RESULTS

Primary care providers' in the VBC group saw, on average, 8 more new TM patients annually than nonadopters. This change is sizable relative to their 22.6 new TM patients in 2023. Additionally, the VBC group kept their panels open to new patients with TM insurance for 0.7 more months per year, on average, than nonadopters, relative to preadoption.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that a VBC model with support may help sustain access to primary care for TM beneficiaries, even as overall availability declines.

摘要

引言

在初级医疗短缺日益严重且基于价值的医疗(VBC)使用增加的背景下,我们评估了在一个赋能组织的支持下,为传统医疗保险(TM)和医疗保险优势计划受益人采用多支付方、全风险VBC模式是否会影响初级医疗服务提供者(PCP)对TM保险新患者的接纳情况。

方法

利用2019 - 2023年索赔数据的差异分析,我们比较了两组在其患者名单中至少有50名TM患者的PCP:208名在2022年获得支持以采用针对TM和医疗保险优势计划患者的VBC模式的PCP,以及3657名维持其现有支付模式的类似PCP。在采用前时期至2023年期间,未采用者中TM保险患者获得新患者就诊机会的下降幅度比采用者更大。

结果

VBC组的初级医疗服务提供者每年平均比未采用者多接待8名新的TM患者。相对于他们在2023年接待的22.6名新TM患者而言,这一变化相当可观。此外,相对于采用前,VBC组每年平均为TM保险新患者开放患者名单的时间比未采用者多0.7个月。

结论

这些发现表明,即使整体可及性下降,得到支持的VBC模式可能有助于维持TM受益人的初级医疗可及性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/daf8/12065130/0980c6784c7b/qxaf093f1.jpg

相似文献

1
Impact of a multi-payer full-risk model on preserving primary care access for traditional medicare beneficiaries.
Health Aff Sch. 2025 Apr 30;3(5):qxaf093. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxaf093. eCollection 2025 May.
2
Comparison of Low-Value Services Among Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries.
JAMA Health Forum. 2022 Sep 2;3(9):e222935. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.2935.
3
Comparison of Ambulatory Care Access and Quality for Beneficiaries With Disabilities Covered by Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare Insurance.
JAMA Health Forum. 2022 Jan 14;3(1):e214562. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.4562. eCollection 2022 Jan.
5
Telehealth availability and use among beneficiaries in Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2025 Feb;73(2):545-551. doi: 10.1111/jgs.19183. Epub 2024 Sep 6.
6
Comparison of Health Care Utilization by Medicare Advantage and Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries With Complex Care Needs.
JAMA Health Forum. 2022 Oct 7;3(10):e223451. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.3451.
8
Health Care Utilization and Spending in Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare: A Difference-in-Differences Analysis.
JAMA Health Forum. 2021 Dec 10;2(12):e214001. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.4001. eCollection 2021 Dec.
9
Role of Patient Sorting in Avoidable Hospital Stays in Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare.
JAMA Health Forum. 2023 Nov 3;4(11):e233931. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.3931.

本文引用的文献

1
US Primary Care Workforce Growth: A Decade of Limited Progress, and Projected Needs Through 2040.
J Gen Intern Med. 2025 Feb;40(2):339-346. doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-09121-x. Epub 2024 Oct 23.
2
Primary care visit cadence and hospital admissions in high-risk patients.
Am J Manag Care. 2024 Jun;30(6):263-269. doi: 10.37765/ajmc.2024.89509.
3
Higher Rates Of Emergency Surgery, Serious Complications, And Readmissions In Primary Care Shortage Areas, 2015-19.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2024 Mar;43(3):363-371. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2023.00843.
4
A Pragmatic Approach to Identifying and Profiling Primary Care Clinicians and Primary Care Practices in the USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2024 Aug;39(11):1962-1968. doi: 10.1007/s11606-024-08627-8. Epub 2024 Jan 25.
5
The Camden Coalition Care Management Program Improved Intermediate Care Coordination: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2024 Jan;43(1):131-139. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01151. Epub 2023 Dec 20.
6
Effects of Primary Care-Led, Integrated Palliative Care for Medicare Patients in a Value-Based Model.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2024 Mar;67(3):195-203. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.11.006. Epub 2023 Nov 14.
7
After 50 Years, Health Professional Shortage Areas Had No Significant Impact On Mortality Or Physician Density.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2023 Nov;42(11):1507-1516. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2023.00478.
8
Primary Care Continuity, Frequency, and Regularity Associated With Medicare Savings.
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Aug 1;6(8):e2329991. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.29991.
9
Comparison of Care Quality Metrics in 2-Sided Risk Medicare Advantage vs Fee-for-Service Medicare Programs.
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Dec 1;5(12):e2246064. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.46064.
10
In Traditional Medicare, Modest Growth In The Home Care Workforce Largely Driven By Nurse Practitioners.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2021 Mar;40(3):478-486. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00671.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验