Association of a Bundled-Payment Program With Cost and Outcomes in Full-Cycle Breast Cancer Care
- PMID: 27768180
- DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4549
Association of a Bundled-Payment Program With Cost and Outcomes in Full-Cycle Breast Cancer Care
Abstract
Importance: Value-driven payment system reform is a potential tool for aligning economic incentives with the improvement of quality and efficiency of health care and containment of cost. Such a payment system has not been researched satisfactorily in full-cycle cancer care.
Objective: To examine the association of outcomes and medical expenditures with a bundled-payment pay-for-performance program for breast cancer in Taiwan compared with a fee-for-service (FFS) program.
Design, setting, and participants: Data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database, National Health Insurance Claims Data, the National Death Registry, and the bundled-payment enrollment file. Women with newly diagnosed breast cancer and a documented first cancer treatment from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2008, were selected from the Taiwan Cancer Database and followed up for 5 years, with the last follow-up data available on December 31, 2013. Patients in the bundled-payment program were matched at a ratio of 1:3 with control individuals in an FFS program using a propensity score method. The final sample of 17 940 patients included 4485 (25%) in the bundled-payment group and 13 455 (75%) in the FFS group.
Main outcomes and measures: Rates of adherence to quality indicators, survival rates, and medical payments (excluding bonuses paid in the bundled-payment group). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate 5-year overall and event-free survival rates by cancer stage, and the Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to examine the effect of the bundled-payment program on overall and event-free survival. Sensitivity analysis for bonus payments in the bundled-payment group was also performed.
Results: The study population included 17 940 women (mean [SD] age, 52.2 [10.3] years). In the bundled-payment group, 1473 of 4215 patients (34.9%) with applicable quality indicators had full (100%) adherence to quality indicators compared with 3438 of 12 506 patients (27.5%) with applicable quality indicators in the FFS group (P < .001). The 5-year event-free survival rates for patients with stages 0 to III breast cancer were 84.48% for the bundled-payment group and 80.88% for the FFS group (P < .01). Although the 5-year medical payments of the bundled-payment group remained stable, the cumulative medical payments for the FFS group steadily increased from $16 000 to $19 230 and exceeded pay-for-performance bundled payments starting in 2008.
Conclusions and relevance: In Taiwan, compared with the regular FFS program, bundled payment may lead to better adherence to quality indicators, better outcomes, and more effective cost-control over time.
Comment in
-
Better Outcomes for Lower Costs in Breast Cancer Care: Finding a Way.JAMA Oncol. 2017 Mar 1;3(3):309-310. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4544. JAMA Oncol. 2017. PMID: 27768165 No abstract available.
-
Evaluating Alternative Payment Models in Oncology.JAMA. 2017 May 23;317(20):2123-2124. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.3028. JAMA. 2017. PMID: 28535216 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
An Empirical Framework for Breast Screening Bundled Payments.J Am Coll Radiol. 2017 Jan;14(1):17-23.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.07.008. Epub 2016 Aug 17. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017. PMID: 27544355
-
Medicare's Bundled Payment Initiatives for Hospital-Initiated Episodes: Evidence and Evolution.Milbank Q. 2020 Sep;98(3):908-974. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12465. Epub 2020 Aug 21. Milbank Q. 2020. PMID: 32820837 Free PMC article.
-
Is There An Association Between Bundled Payments and "Cherry Picking" and "Lemon Dropping" in Orthopaedic Surgery? A Systematic Review.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2021 Nov 1;479(11):2430-2443. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001792. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2021. PMID: 33942797 Free PMC article.
-
Are Bundled Payments a Viable Reimbursement Model for Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016 Dec;474(12):2714-2721. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-4953-6. Epub 2016 Jun 29. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016. PMID: 27357691 Free PMC article.
-
Unraveling the Complexity in the Design and Implementation of Bundled Payments: A Scoping Review of Key Elements From a Payer's Perspective.Milbank Q. 2020 Mar;98(1):197-222. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12438. Epub 2020 Jan 7. Milbank Q. 2020. PMID: 31909852 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Global Trends Towards Population Health Management and Key Lessons and Initiatives in the Singapore Context.Int J Integr Care. 2022 Sep 16;22(3):19. doi: 10.5334/ijic.7016. eCollection 2022 Jul-Sep. Int J Integr Care. 2022. PMID: 36186512 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
The continuum of breast cancer care and outcomes in the U.S. Military Health System: an analysis by benefit type and care source.J Cancer Surviv. 2018 Jun;12(3):407-416. doi: 10.1007/s11764-018-0680-1. Epub 2018 Feb 17. J Cancer Surviv. 2018. PMID: 29455447
-
Effectiveness of Nationwide COPD Pay-for-Performance Program on COPD Exacerbations in Taiwan.Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2021 Oct 18;16:2869-2881. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S329454. eCollection 2021. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2021. PMID: 34703221 Free PMC article.
-
The impact of provider payment reforms and associated care delivery models on cost and quality in cancer care: A systematic literature review.PLoS One. 2019 Apr 5;14(4):e0214382. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214382. eCollection 2019. PLoS One. 2019. PMID: 30951536 Free PMC article.
-
Value-Based Care in the Worldwide Battle Against Cancer.Cureus. 2017 Feb 17;9(2):e1039. doi: 10.7759/cureus.1039. Cureus. 2017. PMID: 28357171 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical