Proportion of Racial Minority Patients and Patients With Low Socioeconomic Status Cared for by Physician Groups After Joining Accountable Care Organizations

Abstract

IMPORTANCE The incentive structure of accountable care organizations (ACOs) may lead to participating physician groups selecting fewer vulnerable patients. OBJECTIVE To test for changes in the percentage of racial minority patients and patients with low socioeconomic status cared for by physician groups after joining the ACO. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective cohort consisted of a 15% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries attributed to physician groups from 2010 to 2016. Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) participation was determined using ACO files. Analyses were conducted between January 1, 2019, and February 25, 2020. EXPOSURES Using linear probability models, we conducted difference-indifferences analyses based on the year a physician group joined an ACO to estimate changes in vulnerable patients within ACO-participating groups compared with nonparticipating groups. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Whether the patient was black, was dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, and poverty and unemployment rates of the patient's zip code. RESULTS In a cohort of 76 717 physician groups caring for 7 307 130 patients, 16.1% of groups caring for 27.8% of patients participated in an MSSP ACO. Using 2010 characteristics, patients attributed to ACOs from 2012 to 2016, compared with those who were not, were less likely to be black (8.0% [n = 81 698] vs 9.3% [n = 270 924]) or dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid (12.8% [n = 130 957] vs 18.2% [n = 528 685]), and lived in zip codes with lower poverty rates (13.8% vs 15.5%); unemployment rates were similar (8.0% vs 8.5%). In the difference-indifferences analysis, there was no statistically significant change associated with ACO participation in the proportions of vulnerable patients attributed to ACO-participating groups compared with nonparticipating groups. After joining an ACO, ACO-participating groups had 0.0 percentage points change (95% CI, −0.1 to 0.1 percentage points; P = .59) for black patients, −0.1 percentage points (95% CI, −0.2 to 0.1 percentage points; P = .32) for patients dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, 0.2 percentage points (95% CI, −3.5 to 4.0 percentage points; P = .91) in poverty rates, and −0.4 percentage points (95% CI, −2.0 to 1.2 percentage points; P = .62) in unemployment rates. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study, there were no changes in the proportions of vulnerable patients cared for by ACO-participating physician groups after joining an ACO compared with changes among nonparticipating groups.

The Effect of Network-Level Payment Models on Care Network Performance: A Scoping Review of the Empirical Literature

“…In shared savings arrangements with little provider risk, two of the ten measures of patient experience improved whereas, when there were higher levels of risk, improvements in patient experience were lacking [101]. Concerning other consequences, the proportion of vulnerable patients served by physician groups was not significantly changed, neither was the adoption of novel technologies for six surgical procedures [99,102].…”

Health Equity Needs Teeth

“…50,51 Continued evaluation and appropriate change management will be necessary to overcome foundational bias and discrimination, both interpersonal and institutional. 52,53 Moreover, health policy based on social justice can reduce inequity, address social determinants of health, and prevent some emergencies. 54 While these changes to create a more equitable model of health care delivery may occur within the systems of payers, work is also needed to ensure that this new, integrated system functions as a social justice practice.…”