IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/22429.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Inner Workings of the Patient Centered Medical Home Model

Author

Listed:
  • Guy David
  • Philip A. Saynisch
  • Aaron Smith-McLallen

Abstract

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is a model for restructuring primary care with a focus on improved access to care and clinical excellence. However, to date, the evidence on its effect on healthcare utilization and expenditures has been quite mixed. One possible reason for this may lie in the flexibility with which a practice can meet the thresholds for PCMH recognition, adopting practice reforms in vastly different domains. Hence, practices with the same recognition level may in fact demonstrate divergent capabilities, and subsequently have different leverage over the achievement of the PCMH goals. We study this idea by using previously unavailable data that spans all PCMH recognition domains. The richness of our data allows us to group practices into clusters based on their choice of attributes during the recognition process, and then examine the performance of individual clusters in reducing healthcare utilization and expenditures. We find that treating the PCMH model as an undifferentiated intervention obscures meaningful variation in implementation across practices. In particular, clusters emphasizing practice improvements like use of decision support, enhanced access to care and population management tools have demonstrated some success in impacting utilization and expenditures patterns after PCMH recognition.

Suggested Citation

  • Guy David & Philip A. Saynisch & Aaron Smith-McLallen, 2016. "The Inner Workings of the Patient Centered Medical Home Model," NBER Working Papers 22429, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:22429
    Note: EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22429.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deborah Peikes & Aparajita Zutshi & Janice L. Genevro & Michael L. Parchman & David S. Meyers, "undated". "Early Evaluations of the Medical Home: Building on a Promising Start," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 1094fccd7adf49af9c5894be2, Mathematica Policy Research.
    2. repec:mpr:mprres:7219 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Roland Strausz, 1997. "Delegation of Monitoring in a Principal-Agent Relationship," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(3), pages 337-357.
    4. Deborah Peikes & Stacy Dale & Eric Lundquist & Janice Genevro & David Meyers, 2011. "Building the Evidence Base for the Medical Home: What Sample and Sample Size Do Studies Need?," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 5814eb8219b24982af7f7536c, Mathematica Policy Research.
    5. repec:mpr:mprres:7381 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Jens Ludwig & Jeffrey R. Kling & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2011. "Mechanism Experiments and Policy Evaluations," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(3), pages 17-38, Summer.
    7. Tracy R. Lewis & David E.M. Sappington, 1991. "Incentives for Monitoring Quality," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(3), pages 370-384, Autumn.
    8. Maskin, Eric S & Riley, John G, 1984. "Optimal Auctions with Risk Averse Buyers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(6), pages 1473-1518, November.
    9. Michael Rothschild & Joseph Stiglitz, 1976. "Equilibrium in Competitive Insurance Markets: An Essay on the Economics of Imperfect Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(4), pages 629-649.
    10. Khalil, Fahad & Lawarree, Jacques, 1995. "Collusive Auditors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 442-446, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, Xue & Sweetman, Arthur, 2018. "Blended capitation and incentives: Fee codes inside and outside the capitated basket," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 16-29.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David, Guy & Saynisch, Philip A. & Smith-McLallen, Aaron, 2018. "The economics of patient-centered care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 60-77.
    2. Natalia Kovrijnykh & Igor Livshits, 2017. "Screening As A Unified Theory Of Delinquency, Renegotiation, And Bankruptcy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 58(2), pages 499-527, May.
    3. Bierbrauer, Felix & Netzer, Nick, 2016. "Mechanism design and intentions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 557-603.
    4. A. Menichini & P. Simmons, "undated". "Can Liars Ever Prosper," Discussion Papers 02/10, Department of Economics, University of York.
    5. Andrei Barbos, 2022. "Optimal contracts with random monitoring," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 51(1), pages 119-154, March.
    6. Chiappinelli, Olga, 2020. "Political corruption in the execution of public contracts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 116-140.
    7. Pietro Ortoleva & Evgenii Safonov & Leeat Yariv, 2021. "Who Cares More? Allocation with Diverse Preference Intensities," Working Papers 2021-10, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    8. Khalil, Fahad & Lawarree, Jacques, 2001. "Catching the agent on the wrong foot: ex post choice of monitoring," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 327-347, December.
    9. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and game theory. A 70th anniversary," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 1-7.
    10. Annamaria Menichini & Peter Simmons, 2001. "Are two investors better than one?," CSEF Working Papers 71, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    11. Scholz, Julia, 2008. "Auswirkungen vertikaler Kollusionsprobleme auf die vertragliche Ausgestaltung von Kreditverkäufen," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 4581, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    12. Andrea Attar & Thomas Mariotti & François Salanié, 2020. "The Social Costs of Side Trading," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(630), pages 1608-1622.
    13. Peter-J. Jost, 2023. "Auditing versus monitoring and the role of commitment," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 463-496, June.
    14. Gan, Li & Huang, Feng & Mayer, Adalbert, 2015. "A simple test for private information in insurance markets with heterogeneous insurance demand," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 197-200.
    15. Shunda, Nicholas, 2009. "Auctions with a buy price: The case of reference-dependent preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 645-664, November.
    16. Alessandro Spiganti, 2022. "Wealth Inequality and the Exploration of Novel Alternatives," Working Papers 2022:02, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    17. Pietro Tebaldi, 2015. "Estimating Equilibrium in Health Insurance Exchanges: Analysis of the Californian Market under the ACA," Discussion Papers 15-012, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    18. Josse Delfgaauw & Robert Dur, 2008. "Incentives and Workers' Motivation in the Public Sector," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 171-191, January.
    19. Hyojoung Kim & Doyoung Kim & Subin Im & James W. Hardin, 2009. "Evidence of Asymmetric Information in the Automobile Insurance Market: Dichotomous Versus Multinomial Measurement of Insurance Coverage," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 76(2), pages 343-366, June.
    20. Lehmann, Markus A., 2002. "Error minimization and deterrence in agency control," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 373-391, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
    • I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • L21 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Business Objectives of the Firm
    • L23 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Organization of Production

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:22429. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.