The Oncology Care Model: A Critique

Author(s):  
Christian A. Thomas ◽  
Jeffrey C. Ward

Rapidly increasing national health care expenditures are a major area of concern as threats to the integrity of the health care system. Significant increases in the cost of care for patients with cancer are driven by numerous factors, most importantly the cost of hospital care and escalating pharmaceutical costs. The current fee-for-service system (FFS) has been identified as a potential driver of the increasing cost of care, and multiple stakeholders are interested in replacing FFS with a system that improves the quality of care while at the same time reducing cost. Several models have been piloted, including a Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation (CMMI)–sponsored medical home model (COME HOME) for patients with solid tumors that was able to generate savings by integrating a phone triage system, pathways, and seamless patient care 7 days a week to reduce overall cost of care, mostly by decreasing patient admissions to hospitals and referrals to emergency departments. CMMI is now launching a new pilot model, the Oncology Care Model (OCM), which differs from COME HOME in several important ways. It does not abolish FFS but provides an additional payment in 6-month increments for each patient on active cancer treatment. It also allows practices to participate in savings if they can decrease the overall cost of care, to include all chemotherapy and supportive care drugs, and fulfill certain quality metrics. A critical discussion of the proposed model, which is scheduled to start in 2016, will be provided at the 2016 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting with practicing oncologists and a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) representative.

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e1045-e1049
Author(s):  
John F. Sandbach ◽  
John Bachelor ◽  
Kimberly Larson ◽  
Denize Jordan ◽  
Janet Mullins ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: Oncology care reimbursement has been shifting from a traditional fee-for-service model to either 1- or 2-sided risk models during the past 5 years. A major expense associated with the total cost of care is hospitalization cost. The study set out to investigate whether the creation of an Advanced Community Care Model (ACCM) of home health care would affect 60-day hospitalization and 30-rehospitalization rates in a community oncology setting. METHODS: In conjunction with a single home health care organization, an ACCM was modified for oncology care to include intervention protocols to address antiemetic issues, pain control, dehydration, shortness of breath, diarrhea, and fever. Weekly and monthly joint management meetings began. Quality metrics were defined. RESULTS: Overall, 457 unique home health care admissions were evaluated. Hospitalization associated with intervention protocols was evaluated. Sixty-day hospitalization rates decreased from 14% to 8%. Thirty-day rehospitalization rates decreased from 25% to 10%. CONCLUSION: An oncology ACCM, as created in this study, appears to have reduced both 60-day hospitalization and 30-day rehospitalization rates.


2000 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Eichner ◽  
Mark McClellan ◽  
David A. Wise

We are engaged in a long-term project to analyze the determinants of health care cost differences across firms. An important first step is to summarize the nature of expenditure differences across plans. The goal of this article is to develop methods for identifying and quantifying those factors that account for the wide differences in health care expenditures observed across plans.We consider eight plans that vary in average expenditure for individuals filing claims, from a low of $1,645 to a high of $2,484. We present a statistically consistent method for decomposing the cost differences across plans into component parts based on demographic characteristics of plan participants, the mix of diagnoses for which participants are treated, and the cost of treatment for particular diagnoses. The goal is to quantify the contribution of each of these components to the difference between average cost and the cost in a given firm. The demographic mix of plan enrollees accounts for wide differnces in cost ($649). Perhaps the most noticeable feature of the results is that, after adjusting for demographic mix, the difference in expenditures accounted for by the treatment costs given diagnosis ($807) is almost as wide as the unadjusted range in expenditures ($838). Differences in cost due to the different illnesses that are treated, after adjusting for demographic mix, also accounts for large differences in cost ($626). These components of cost do not move together; for example, demographic mix may decrease expenditure under a particular plan while the diagnosis mix may increase costs.Our hope is that understanding the reasons for cost differences across plans will direct more focused attention to controlling costs. Indeed, this work is intended as an important first step toward that goal.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan B. Thomas ◽  
Vittorio Maio ◽  
Anna Chen ◽  
Seojin Park ◽  
Dexter Waters ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: To explore mean difference between Oncology Care Model (OCM) total costs and target price among breast cancer episodes by stage under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services OCM payment methodology. METHODS: Breast cancer episodes from OCM performance period 1-4 reconciliation reports (July 1, 2016-July 1, 2018) were linked with health record data from a large, academic medical center. Demographics, total cost of care (TCOC), and target price were measured by stage. Adjusted differences between TCOC and target price were compared across cancer stage using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 539 episodes were evaluated from 252 unique patients with breast cancer, of which 235 (44%) were stage I, 124 (23%) stage II, 33 (6%) stage III, and 147 (27%) stage IV. About 37% of episodes exceeded target price. Mean differences from target price were –$1,782, $2,246, –$6,032, and $11,379 all in US dollars (USD) for stages I through IV, respectively. Stage IV episodes had highest mean TCOC ($44,210 USD) and mean target price ($32,831 USD) but also had higher rates of chemotherapy, inpatient admission, and novel therapy use. After adjusting for covariates, stage IV and ≥ 65-year-old patients had the highest mean difference from target price ($17,175 USD; 95% CI, $12,452 to $21,898 USD). CONCLUSION: Breast cancer episodes in older women with distant metastases most frequently exceeded target price, suggesting that target price did not adequately account for complexity of metastatic cancers. A metastatic adjustment introduced in PP7 represents a promising advancement in the target price methodology and an impact evaluation will be needed.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James O'Connell ◽  
Niamh Reidy ◽  
Cora McNally ◽  
Debbi Stanistreet ◽  
Eoghan de Barra ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Tuberculosis elimination (TB) is a global priority that requires high-quality timely care to be achieved. In low TB incidence countries such as Ireland, delayed diagnosis is common. Despite cost being central to policy making, it is not known if delayed care affects care cost among TB patients in a low-incidence setting. Methods Health care records of patients with signs and symptoms of TB evaluated by a tertiary service in Ireland between July 1st 2018 and December 31st 2019 were reviewed to measure and determine predictors of patient-related delays, health care-provider related delay and the cost of TB care. Benchmarks against which the outcomes were compared were derived from the literature. Results Thirty-seven patients were diagnosed with TB and 51% (19/37) had pulmonary TB (PTB). The median patient-related delay was 60 days among those with PTB, greater than the benchmark derived from the literature (38 days). The median health care provider-related delay among patients with PTB was 16 days and, although similar to the benchmark (median 22 days, minimum 11 days, maximum 36 days) could be improved. The health care-provider related delay among patients with EPTB was 66 days, greater than the benchmark (42 days). The cost of care was €8298, and while similar to that reported in the literature (median €9,319, minimum €6,486, maximum €14,750) could be improved. Patient-related delay among those with PTB predicted care costs. Conclusion Patient-related and health care-related delays in TB diagnosis in Ireland must be reduced. Initiatives to do so should be resourced.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 168-170
Author(s):  
Stephen M. Davidson ◽  
John P. Connelly ◽  
R. Don Blim ◽  
James E. Strain ◽  
H. Doyl Taylor

The National Commission on the Cost of Medical Care1 states in part (Recommendation 2) that "insurance policies should include provisions through which the consumer shares in the cost of care received, at the time of service, for selected benefits and for selected groups...." These cost-sharing provisions are expected to reduce national medical care expenditures by encouraging consumers to reduce their use of services in order to avoid paying additional money out of their own pockets. They will thus moderate the demand-inducing tendency of insurance, leading the rational consumer to seek only necessary services and to forego those services contributing to what is believed to be over-utilization. As the Commission states in its supporting statement:


1998 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 415-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan E. Beltz ◽  
Gary C. Yee

Background In 1990, annual costs of the diagnosis and treatment of cancer reached nearly $100 billion and currently constitutes approximately 10% of health care expenditures in the United States. As new and often more expensive therapies for cancer treatment become available, the health care decision- maker must consider the cost effectiveness of the therapy. Methods Key principles of economic analyses and the inherent differences among these analyses are reviewed. Results While pharmacoeconomic analyses are increasingly being used in treatment decision-making, several issues relating to study design, data collection, and research methods are controversial. Conclusions Pharmacoeconomics analyses are necessary in the current health care environment, but the assumptions used within the analyses warrant careful evaluation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (10) ◽  
pp. 1718-1728 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E Targownik ◽  
Eric I Benchimol ◽  
Julia Witt ◽  
Charles N Bernstein ◽  
Harminder Singh ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Anti–tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drugs are highly effective in the treatment of moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), but they are very costly. Due to their effectiveness, they could potentially reduce future health care spending on other medical therapies, hospitalization, and surgery. The impact of downstream costs has not previously been quantified in a real-world population-based setting. Methods We used the University of Manitoba IBD Database to identify all persons in a Canadian province with CD or UC who received anti-TNF therapy between 2004 and 2016. All inpatient, outpatient, and drug costs were enumerated both in the year before anti-TNF initiation and for up to 5 years after anti-TNF initiation. Costs before and after anti-TNF initiation were compared, and multivariate linear regression analyses were performed to look for predictors of higher costs after anti-TNF initiation. Results A total of 928 people with IBD (676 CD, 252 UC) were included for analyses. The median cost of health care in the year before anti-TNF therapy was $4698 for CD vs $6364 for UC. The median cost rose to $39,749 and $49,327, respectively, in the year after anti-TNF initiation, and to $210,956 and $245,260 in the 5 years after initiation for continuous anti-TNF users. Inpatient and outpatient costs decreased in the year after anti-TNF initiation by 12% and 7%, respectively, when excluding the cost of anti-TNFs. Conclusions Direct health care expenditures markedly increase after anti-TNF initiation and continue to stay elevated over pre-initiation costs for up to 5 years, with only small reductions in the direct costs of non-drug-related health care.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. e375-e383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle B. Rocque ◽  
Courtney P. Williams ◽  
Kelly M. Kenzik ◽  
Bradford E. Jackson ◽  
Karina I. Halilova ◽  
...  

Purpose: The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is a highly controversial specialty care model developed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid aimed to provide higher-quality care at lower cost. Because oncologists will be increasingly held accountable for spending as well as quality within new value-based health care models like the OCM, they need to understand the drivers of total spending for their patients. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients ≥ 65 years of age with primary fee-for-service Medicare insurance who received antineoplastic therapy at 12 cancer centers in the Southeast from 2012 to 2014. Medicare administrative claims data were used to identify health care spending during the prechemotherapy period (from cancer diagnosis to antineoplastic therapy initiation) and during the OCM episodes of care triggered by antineoplastic treatment. Total health care spending per episode includes all types of services received by a patient, including nononcology services. Spending was further characterized by type of service. Results: Average total health care spending in the three OCM episodes of care was $33,838 (n = 3,427), $23,811 (n = 1,207), and $19,241 (n = 678). Antineoplastic drugs accounted for 27%, 32%, and 36% of total health care spending in the first, second, and third episodes. Ten drugs, used by 31% of patients, contributed 61% to drug spending ($18.8 million) in the first episode. Inpatient spending also substantially contributed to total costs, representing 17% to 20% ($30.5 million) of total health care spending. Conclusion: Health care spending was heavily driven by both antineoplastic drugs and hospital use. Oncologists’ ability to affect these types of spending will determine their success under alternative payment models.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document