No abstract

IMPORTANCE Public and private payers continue to expand use of alternative payment models, aiming to use value-based payment to affect the care delivery of their contracted health system partners. In parallel, health systems and their employment of physicians continue to grow. However, the degree to which health system physician compensation reflects an orientation toward value, rather than volume, is unknown. OBJECTIVE To characterize primary care physician (PCP) and specialist compensation arrangements among US health system-affiliated physician organizations (POs) and measure the portion of total physician compensation based on quality and cost performance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis study was a cross-sectional mixed-methods analysis of in-depth multimodal data (compensation document review, interviews with 40 PO leaders, and surveys conducted between November 2017 and July 2019) from 31 POs affiliated with 22 purposefully selected health systems in 4 states. Data were analyzed from June 2019 to September 2020. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe frequency of PCP and specialist compensation types and the percentage of compensation when included, including base compensation incentives, quality and cost performance incentives, and other financial incentives. The top 3 actions physicians could take to increase their compensation. The association between POs' percentage of revenue from fee-for-service and their physicians' volume-based compensation percentage. RESULTSVolume-based compensation was the most common base compensation incentive component for PCPs (26 POs [83.9%]; mean, 68.2% of compensation; median, 81.4%; range, 5.0%-100.0% when included) and specialists (29 POs [93.3%]; mean, 73.7% of compensation; median, 90.5%; range, 2.5%-100.0% when included). While quality and cost performance incentives were common (included by 83.9%-56.7% of POs for PCPs and specialists, respectively), the percentage of compensation based on quality and cost performance was modest (mean, 9.0% [median, 8.3%; range, 1.0%-25.0%] for PCPs and 5.3% [median, 4.5%; range, 0.5%-16.0%] for specialists when included). Increasing the volume of services was the most commonly cited action for physicians to increase compensation, reported as the top action by 22 POs (70.0%) for PCPs and specialists. We observed a very weak, nonsignificant association between the percentage of revenue of POs from fee for service and the PCP and specialist volume-based compensation percentage (r = 0.08; P = .78 and r = −0.04; P = .89, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe results of this cross-sectional study suggest that PCPs and specialists despite receiving value-based reimbursement incentives from payers, the compensation (continued) Key Points Question Do health system physician compensation arrangements primarily incentivize volume or value? Findings This cross-sectional mixedmethods study of 31 physician organizations affiliated with 22 US health systems found that volume was a component of primary care and specialist compensation for most P...

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives: Young children enrolled in Medicaid make few dental visits and have high rates of tooth decay. To improve access to care, state Medicaid programs have enacted policies encouraging nondental providers to deliver preventive oral health services (POHS) in medical offices. Policies vary by state, with some states requiring medical providers to obtain training prior to delivering POHS. Our objective was to test whether these training requirements were associated with higher rates of POHS for Medicaid-enrolled children <6 years. Methods: This study took advantage of a natural experiment in which policy enactment occurred across states at different times. We used Medicaid Analytic eXtract enrollment and claims data, public policy data, and Area Health Resource Files data. We examined an unweighted sample of 8, 711,192 (45,107,240 weighted) Medicaid-enrolled children <6 years in 38 states from 2006 to 2014. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated the odds a child received POHS in a calendar year. Results are presented as adjusted probabilities.Results: Five or more years after policy enactment, the probability of a child receiving POHS in medical offices was 10.7 percent in states with training requirements compared to 5.0 percent in states without training requirements (P = 0.01). Findings were similar when receipt of any POHS in medical or dental offices was examined 5 or more years post-policy-enactment (requirement = 42.5 percent, no requirement = 33.6 percent, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Medicaid policies increased young children's receipt of POHS and at higher rates in states that required POHS training. These results suggest that oral health training for nondental practitioners is a key component of policy success.