Integrated Inpatient/Outpatient Care for Patients at High Risk of Hospitalization
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Active, not recruiting
- Sponsor
- University of Chicago
- Enrollment
- 2,008
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Patient Satisfaction
Study Overview
Brief Summary
The investigators propose an innovative new model of care in which patients identified to be at high risk of hospitalization are offered care by a physician who will direct their care both in the hospital and in clinic but is able to do so because they see patients only at high risk of hospitalization. This allows these physicians to have a panel of patients that is small enough that they can provide them with continuing ambulatory care but sick enough for those physicians to have enough of their patients hospitalized at any time to justify having the physician spend several hours each morning seeing those patients in the hospital, making the model economically viable and clinically valuable for the patient. The investigators estimate that each of the 5 physicians the investigators propose to establish in this model will serve a panel of about 200 patients in steady state with an average of 10 days of expected hospitalization and $75,000 each in Medicare spending per year, totaling $75 million annually. The investigators estimate that a 1% reduction in costs for these patients will be more than enough to cover the ongoing costs of the model the investigators propose; this is because the investigators' program reorganizes care rather than adding new forms of care.
Detailed Description
The investigators' project has 5 aims:
Aim 1: To implement an innovative Comprehensive Care Physician (CCP) Model of multi-disciplinary team-based care at the University of Chicago Medical Center (UCMC) in which care for patients at high risk of hospitalization is led by CCPs who focus their practices on patients at high risk of hospitalization so that they can personally care for these patients both in clinic and in the hospital, with savings to Medicare shared with the AMC.
As noted above and supported by theory and data below, the key justification for this goal is based on the value of the doctor-patient relationship. Building on 15 years experience developing our hospitalist program (IRB protocol 9967) from 2 to 30 clinicians, the investigators provide detailed plans to efficiently implement the investigators' model to improve care within 6 months. To incentivize and assess cost-savings, the investigators propose:
Aim 2: Among patients who meet clinical eligibility criteria for the CCP model and express willingness to receive care in the model, to assess the utilization and quality of health care, health outcomes, and cost of care of patients randomly assigned to be offered CCP care compared to patients randomly assigned not to be offered CCP care.
Evaluation is important in the investigators' project both to ensure that the investigators meet the triple-aim and because assessment of cost savings is needed to implement the shared savings model that the investigators think is important to incentivize cost savings. The investigators recognize that the use of randomization to assess out-comes cannot be the basis for a long-term payment model in Medicare but select this approach to evaluation because the investigators think it will provide the most accurate estimate of the effects of the program. Assuming capitated payments to Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) become a major payment approach for Medicare, cost savings from CCPs would create sustainable incentives for their use. CCPs might also work well in ACOs because selection of high risk patients into a CCP program might not be a concern if those patient came from within the ACO's covered population. Sustained incentives to use CCPs could also exist if high-risk persons selected into ACOs with CCPs, but risk adjustment was adequate. Shared savings programs with adequate risk adjustment would produce similar incentives. To address dissemination and risk adjustment, the investigators propose:
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Health Services Research
- Masking
- None
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •Medicare recipients and were hospitalized at least one time in the past year
Exclusion Criteria
- •Non-Medicare recipients and/or were not hospitalized in the past year
Arms & Interventions
Standard of Care
If patients are randomized to standard of care, they are not assigned to a Comprehensive Care Physician. They are asked to continue receiving their care as they normally would.
Comprehensive Care
Patients randomized to the Comprehensive Care group are assigned to a Comprehensive Care physician and are asked to see their assigned CCP for their primary care. The patients will receive their care by the CCP in the outpatient clinic and also if they were to be hospitalized.
Intervention: Comprehensive Care (Other)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Patient Satisfaction
Time Frame: Every 3 months after patient enrollment up to 3 years
patient satisfaction measured by Consumer Assessment of Health Plans (CAHPs) instrument
Total Cost of Care
Time Frame: Cumulative costs after enrollment up to 3 years
Total cost of care will be measured using Medicare claims data obtained from RESDAC to examine all care that charged to Medicare, including use of acute care hospitals, physician services, SNF, home health, hospice, etc., and Part D. We will also seek to link to data from Illinois Medicaid for our dual eligibles.
Secondary Outcomes
- Doctor-patient relationship(Every 3 months after enrollment up to 3 years)
- Patient outcomes(Every 3 months after enrollment up to 3 years)
- Care utilization(Cumulative utilization from patient enrollment up to 3 years)
- Mortality(Cumulative after enrollment up to 3 years)