Financial and quality impacts of the Medicare physician group practice demonstration.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of the Medicare Physician Group Practice (PGP) demonstration on expenditure, utilization, and quality outcomes. DATA SOURCE: Secondary data analysis of 2001-2010 Medicare claims for 1,776,387 person years assigned to the ten participating provider organizations and 1,579,080 person years in the corresponding local comparison groups. STUDY DESIGN: We used a pre-post comparison group observational design consisting of four pre-demonstration years (1/01-12/04) and five demonstration years (4/05-3/10). We employed a propensity-weighted difference-in-differences regression model to estimate demonstration effects, adjusting for demographics, health status, geographic area, and secular trends. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The ten demonstration sites combined saved $171 (2.0%) per assigned beneficiary person year (p<0.001) during the five-year demonstration period. Medicare paid performance bonuses to the participating PGPs that averaged $102 per person year. The net savings to the Medicare program were $69 (0.8%) per person year. Demonstration savings were achieved primarily from the inpatient setting. The demonstration improved quality of care as measured by six of seven claims-based process quality indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The PGP demonstration, which used a payment model similar to the Medicare Accountable Care Organization (ACO) program, resulted in small reductions in Medicare expenditures and inpatient utilization, and improvements in process quality indicators. Judging from this demonstration experience, it is unlikely that Medicare ACOs will initially achieve large savings. Nevertheless, ACOs paid through shared savings may be an important first step toward greater efficiency and quality in the Medicare fee-for-service program.

Care of long-term cancer survivors: physicians seen by Medicare enrollees surviving longer than 5 years.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that follow-up care for cancer patients differs by physician specialty, and that coordination between specialists and generalists results in better care. Little is known, however, regarding which specialties of physicians provide care to long-term cancer survivors. METHODS: The authors used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data from 1992 through 1997 that were linked to 1997-2003 Medicare data to identify persons diagnosed >5 years earlier with bladder, female breast, colorectal, prostate, or uterine cancer. Physician specialties were assigned by combining Medicare data with the American Medical Association Masterfile and the Unique Physician Identification Number Registry. The percentage of long-term survivors who visited physicians of interest was determined by analyzing Medicare outpatient claims submitted 6 to 12 years after initial diagnosis. RESULTS: Over the entire study period, 46% of female breast cancer survivors, 26% of colorectal cancer survivors, and 14% of prostate cancer survivors saw hematologists/oncologists. Radiation oncologists were seen by 11%, 2%, and 14% of breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors, respectively. Survivors also sought care from specialists related to their cancer: 19% of breast cancer survivors had a cancer-coded visit with a surgeon, 26% of colorectal cancer survivors visited a gastroenterologist, and 68% of prostate cancer survivors visited a urologist. The percentage of survivors who visited cancer and cancer-related physicians declined each year. In contrast, nearly 75% of female breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors saw primary care providers, and these percentages did not decrease annually. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the current study underscore the need to include both primary care providers and cancer-related specialists in education and guidelines regarding cancer survivorship.

Enhancement of identifying cancer specialists through the linkage of Medicare claims to additional sources of physician specialty.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the number of cancer specialists identified in three national datasets, the effect of combining these datasets, and the use of refinement rules to classify physicians as cancer specialists. DATA SOURCES: 1992-2003 linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data and a cancer-free comparison population of Medicare beneficiaries, Unique Physician Identification Number (UPIN) Registry, and the American Medical Association (AMA) Masterfile. STUDY DESIGN: We compared differences in counts of cancer specialists identified in Medicare claims only with the number obtained by combining data sources and after using rules to refine specialty identification. DATA EXTRACTION: We analyzed physician specialty variables provided on Medicare claims, along with the specialties obtained by linkage of unencrypted UPINs on Medicare claims to the UPIN Registry, the AMA Masterfile, and all sources combined. PRINCIPLE FINDINGS: Medicare claims identified the fewest number of cancer specialists (n=11,721) compared with 19,753 who were identified when we combined all three datasets. The percentage increase identified by combining datasets varied by subspecialty (187 percent for surgical oncologists to 50 percent for radiation oncologists). Rules created to refine identification most affected the count of radiation oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers should consider taking the additional effort and cost to refine classification by using additional data sources based on their study objectives.

Specialty versus community hospitals: referrals, quality, and community benefits.

In this paper we compare physician referral patterns, quality, patient satisfaction, and community benefits of physician-owned specialty versus peer competitor hospitals. Our results are based on evidence gathered from site visits to six markets, 2003 Medicare claims, patient focus groups, and Internal Revenue Service data. Although physician-owners are more likely than others to refer to their own facilities and treat a healthier population, there are rationales for these patterns aside from motives for profit. Specialty hospitals provide generally high-quality care to satisfied patients. Uncompensated care plus specialty hospitals' taxes represent a greater burden, in percentage terms, than community benefits provided by nonprofit providers.

BBA impacts on hospital residents, finances, and Medicare subsidies.

Concern over rapidly rising Medicare expenditures prompted Congress to pass the 1997 Balanced Budget Act (BBA) that included provisions reducing graduate medical education (GME) payments and capped the growth in residents for payment purposes. Using Medicare cost reports through 2001, we find that both actual and capped residents continued to grow post-BBA. While teaching hospital total margins declined, GME payment reductions of approximately 17 percent had minimal impact on revenue growth (-0.5 percent annually). Four years after BBA, residents remained a substantial line of business for nearly one-half of teaching hospitals with Medicare effective marginal subsidies exceeding resident stipends by nearly $50,000 on average. Coupled with an estimated replacement cost of over $100,000 per resident, it is not surprising that hospitals accepted nearly 4,000 residents beyond their allowable payment caps in just 4 years post-BBA.

Linking physician characteristics and medicare claims data: issues in data availability, quality, and measurement.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly, investigators are using administrative databases to answer research questions requiring physician characteristics information. This article provides a roadmap for investigators who use Medicare data to answer such questions, focusing on use of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare files. METHODS: Three data sources that can be linked to identify physician characteristics-Medicare claims, the Unique Physician Identification Number (UPIN) Registry, and the American Medical Association (AMA) Masterfile-were examined for data availability, linkage rates, and quality. These databases also were used to explore measurement issues regarding physician specialty and practice volume. RESULTS: Over 98 percent of UPINs identified from the Medicare claims could be linked with both the AMA Masterfile and the UPIN Registry. The AMA Masterfile is the best source of sociodemographic and medical training information; the Medicare claims are the best source of practice ZIP code; and the UPIN Registry is the best source of practice organization data. The operationalization of variables such as physician specialty and practice volume is dependent on the specific research question that is being addressed. CONCLUSION: Administrative databases, such as SEER-Medicare data linked to AMA Masterfile or UPIN Registry data, are an important resource for investigators interested in assessing the relationship between physicians' personal and practice characteristics and the content or outcomes of clinical care.