scholarly journals Measuring the Cost of the Patient-Centered Medical Home

2017 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 327-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert D. Lieberthal ◽  
Colleen Payton ◽  
Mona Sarfaty ◽  
George Valko
Author(s):  
Ray D. Page ◽  
Lee N. Newcomer ◽  
John D. Sprandio ◽  
Barbara L. McAneny

In recent years, the cost of providing quality cancer care has been subject to an epic escalation causing concerns on the verge of a health care crisis. Innovative patient-management models in oncology based on patient-centered medical home (PCMH) principles, coupled with alternative payments to traditional fee for service (FFS), such as bundled and episodes payment are now showing evidence of effectiveness. These efforts have the potential to bend the cost curve while also improving quality of care and patient satisfaction. However, going forward with FFS alternatives, there are several performance-based payment options with an array of financial risks and rewards. Most novel payment options convey a greater financial risk and accountability on the provider. Therefore, the oncology medical home (OMH) can be a way to mitigate some financial risks by sharing savings with the payer through better global care of the patient, proactively preventing complications, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations. However, much of the medical home infrastructure that is required to reduced total costs of cancer care comes as an added expense to the provider. As best-of-practice quality standards are being elucidated and refined, we are now at a juncture where payers, providers, policymakers, and other stakeholders should work in concert to expand and implement the OMH framework into the variety of oncology practice environments to better equip them to assimilate into the new payment reform configurations of the future.


2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 429-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. K. Magill ◽  
D. Ehrenberger ◽  
D. L. Scammon ◽  
J. Day ◽  
T. Allen ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 508-517
Author(s):  
Larry R. Hearld ◽  
Kristine R. Hearld ◽  
Claudia Guerrazzi

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) has increasingly received attention as a model of care to potentially remedy the cost and quality problems that confront the US health care system, including and especially ambulatory care–related issues. This study examined the association between physician practices’ PCMH capacity and 3 indicators of ambulatory care utilization: (1) emergency department utilization, (2) ambulatory care sensitive hospitalization rate, and (3) 30-day all-cause readmission rate. Results show that overall PCMH capacity is associated with lower rates, and technical aspects of the PCMH in particular were associated with lower utilization rates while interpersonal capabilities were not.


2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. A81
Author(s):  
A. Vegesna ◽  
R.D. Lieberthal ◽  
C. Payton ◽  
M. Sarfaty ◽  
G. Valko

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 580-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fadya El Rayess ◽  
Roberta Goldman ◽  
Christopher Furey ◽  
Rabin Chandran ◽  
Arnold R. Goldberg ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Background The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is an accepted framework for delivering high-quality primary care, prompting many residencies to transform their practices into PCMHs. Few studies have assessed the impact of these changes on residents' and faculty members' PCMH attitudes, knowledge, and skills. The family medicine program at Brown University achieved Level 3 PCMH accreditation in 2010, with training relying primarily on situated learning through immersion in PCMH practice, supplemented by didactics and a few focused clinical activities. Objective To assess PCMH knowledge and attitudes after Level 3 PCMH accreditation and to identify additional educational needs. Methods We used a qualitative approach, with semistructured, individual interviews with 12 of the program's 13 postgraduate year 3 residents and 17 of 19 core faculty. Questions assessed PCMH knowledge, attitudes, and preparedness for practicing, teaching, and leading within a PCMH. Interviews were analyzed using the immersion/crystallization method. Results Residents and faculty generally had positive attitudes toward PCMH. However, many expressed concerns that they lacked specific PCMH knowledge, and felt inadequately prepared to implement PCMH principles into their future practice or teaching. Some exceptions were faculty and resident leaders who were actively involved in the PCMH transformation. Barriers included lack of time and central roles in PCMH activities. Conclusions Practicing in a certified PCMH training program, with passive PCMH roles and supplemental didactics, appears inadequate in preparing residents and faculty for practice or teaching in a PCMH. Purposeful curricular design and evaluation, with faculty development, may be needed to prepare the future leaders of primary care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document