Evaluating community health centers' adoption of a new global capitation payment (eCHANGE) study protocol.

Primary care patient-centered medical homes (PCMHs) are an effective healthcare delivery model. Evidence regarding the most effective payment models for increased coordination efforts is sparse. This protocol paper describes the evaluation of an Alternative Payment Methodology (APM) implemented in a subset of Oregon community health centers (CHCs), using a prospective matched observational design. The APM is a primary care payment reform intervention that changed Oregon's Medicaid payment for several CHCs from fee-for-service reimbursement to a per-member-per-month capitated payment. We will implement a difference-in-difference analytic approach to evaluate pre-post APM changes between intervention and control groups, including: 1) clinic-level outcomes, 2) patient-level clinical outcomes, and 3) patient-level econometric outcomes. Findings from the project will be of national significance, as there is a need for evidence regarding how novel payment methods might enhance PCMH capabilities and support their capacity to produce better quality and outcomes. If this capitated payment method is proven effective, study findings will inform dissemination of similar APMs nationwide.

Assessing Community Cancer care after insurance ExpanSionS (ACCESS) study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the second most common cause of mortality in the United States. Cancer screening and prevention services have contributed to improved overall cancer survival rates in the past 40 years. Vulnerable populations (i.e., uninsured, low-income, and racial/ethnic minorities) are disproportionately affected by cancer, receive significantly fewer cancer prevention services, poorer healthcare, and subsequently lower survival rates than insured, white, non-Hispanic populations. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) aims to provide health insurance to all low-income citizens and legal residents, including an expansion of Medicaid eligibility for those earning ≤138% of federal poverty level. As of 2012, Medicaid was expanded in 32 states and the District of Columbia, while 18 states did not expand, creating a 'natural experiment' to assess the impact of Medicaid expansion on cancer prevention and care. METHODS: We will use electronic health record data from up to 990 community health centers available up to 24-months before and at least one year after Medicaid expansion. Primary outcomes include health insurance and coverage status, and type of insurance. Additional outcomes include healthcare delivery, number and types of encounters, and receipt of cancer prevention and screening for all patients and preventive care and screening services for cancer survivors. DISCUSSION: Cancer morbidity and mortality is greatly reduced through screening and prevention, but uninsured patients are much less likely than insured patients to receive these services as recommended. This natural policy experiment will provide valuable information about cancer-related healthcare services as the US tackles the distribution of healthcare resources and future health reform. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrails.gov identifier NCT02936609.