GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)  (2)
  • Navathe, Amol S.  (2)
  • Sylwestrzak, Gosia  (2)
Material
Publisher
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)  (2)
Person/Organisation
Language
Years
Subjects(RVK)
  • 1
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 38, No. 15_suppl ( 2020-05-20), p. 2016-2016
    Abstract: 2016 Background: Efforts to standardize quality and control cost growth for cancer care have focused heavily on promoting evidence-based cancer drug prescribing. We evaluated the association between a national commercial insurer’s ongoing pay-for-performance (P4P) program for oncology and changes in prescribing of evidence-based cancer drugs and spending. Methods: Retrospective difference-in-differences quasi-experimental study utilizing administrative claims data from the insurer’s commercial health plans in 14 states covering 6.7% of US adults. We included patients 18 years of age or older with breast, colon, or lung cancer who were prescribed cancer drug regimens by 1,867 participating oncology physicians between 2013 and 2017. We leveraged the geographically staggered, time-varying rollout of the P4P program to simulate a stepped-wedge study design. Specifically, we estimated a patient-level model clustered by physician and used physician fixed-effects to examine pre- to post-intervention changes in evidence-based prescribing and spending for patients of participating physicians eligible earlier versus later in the period of P4P program rollout. We evaluated four categories of spending over a 6-month episode period: cancer drug spending; other (non-cancer drug) health care spending; total episode spending; and patient out-of-pocket spending. Results: The P4P program was associated with an increase in evidence-based regimen prescribing from 57.1% of patients in the pre-intervention periods to 62.2% in the post-intervention periods for a difference of +5.1 percentage points (pp) (95% CI 3.0 pp to 7.2 pp, P 〈 0.001). The P4P program was also associated with a differential $3,235 (95% CI $1,004 to $5,466, P= 0.005) increase in cancer drug spending, a differential $253 (95% CI $101 to $406, P= 0.001) increase in patient out-of-pocket spending, but no significant changes in other health care spending or total health care spending over the 6-month episode period. Conclusions: A national insurer’s oncology P4P program was associated with a 5.1 percentage point increase in prescribing of evidence-based cancer drug regimens. Our findings suggest that P4P programs may be effective in increasing evidence-based cancer drug prescribing at national scale -- enhancing cancer care quality. However, they may also increase out-of-pocket expenses and may not lead to savings in total health care spending during the 6-month episode.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 38, No. 34 ( 2020-12-01), p. 4055-4063
    Abstract: Cancer drug prescribing by medical oncologists accounts for the greatest variation in practice and the largest portion of spending on cancer care. We evaluated the association between a national commercial insurer’s ongoing pay-for-performance (P4P) program for oncology and changes in the prescribing of evidence-based cancer drugs and spending. METHODS We conducted an observational difference-in-differences study using administrative claims data covering 6.7% of US adults. We leveraged the geographically staggered, time-varying rollout of the P4P program to simulate a stepped-wedge study design. We included patients age 18 years or older with breast, colon, or lung cancer who were prescribed cancer drug regimens by 1,867 participating oncologists between 2013 and 2017. The exposure was a time-varying dichotomous variable equal to 1 for patients who were prescribed a cancer drug regimen after the P4P program was offered. The primary outcome was whether a patient’s drug regimen was a program-endorsed, evidence-based regimen. We also evaluated spending over a 6-month episode period. RESULTS The P4P program was associated with an increase in evidence-based regimen prescribing from 57.1% of patients in the preintervention period to 62.2% in the intervention period, for a difference of +5.1 percentage point (95% CI, 3.0 percentage points to 7.2 percentage points; P 〈 .001). The P4P program was also associated with a differential $3,339 (95% CI, $1,121 to $5,557; P = .003) increase in cancer drug spending and a differential $253 (95% CI, $100 to $406; P = .001) increase in patient out-of-pocket spending, but no significant changes in total health care spending ($2,772; 95% CI, −$181 to $5,725; P = .07) over the 6-month episode period. CONCLUSION P4P programs may be effective in increasing evidence-based cancer drug prescribing, but may not yield cost savings.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...