Cost Impact of Chronic Care Management Services in a Large Multi-Specialty Practice: A Pragmatic Outcomes Study
Clark, B. W.; Webster, J.; Chatterjee, S.; Finch, M. D.
Show abstract
BackgroundChronic Care Management (CCM) services represent an underutilized Medicare benefit with potential to reduce healthcare costs and improve care coordination for beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions. ObjectiveTo evaluate the real-world impact of CCM services on healthcare expenditures and patient out-of-pocket costs in a large multi-specialty outpatient practice. DesignPragmatic retrospective cohort study comparing Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in CCM services versus eligible non-enrolled beneficiaries. SettingLarge multi-specialty outpatient clinic in Alabama with 77 physicians across more than 20 specialties. ParticipantsTreatment group (n=6,093) consisted of patients continuously enrolled in CCM services between January 1, 2024 and December 31, 2024. Comparison group (n=30,432) included eligible patients who were not enrolled in CCM services during the same period. InterventionStructured CCM program delivered by licensed practical nurses (LPNs) providing monthly telephone or video encounters focused on care plan implementation, medication reconciliation, care coordination, preventive health maintenance, and social determinants of health. Main MeasuresPer-member-per-year (PMPM) paid amounts and patient out-of-pocket expenditures, adjusted for age and sex differences. ResultsThe CCM treatment group demonstrated 13.6% lower unadjusted healthcare costs compared to the comparison group ($96 vs. $110 PMPM). After adjusting for demographic differences, cost savings increased to 17.1% ($75 vs. $89 PMPM). Patient out-of-pocket expenses were 16% lower in the treatment group ($29 vs. $34 PMPM). These savings were achieved despite the treatment group being 2% older on average and including 10% more female beneficiaries--both factors typically associated with higher healthcare costs. ConclusionsImplementation of structured CCM services in a real-world multi-specialty practice setting is associated with reductions in both total healthcare expenditures and patient out-of-pocket costs. These findings support CCM as a practical, cost-effective approach to chronic disease management that benefits patients.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Covid-19 and Excess Mortality in Medicare Beneficiaries 92%
- Essential Indicators of Quality in Primary Care Settings: An Evidence-Based, Structured, Expert Approach 92%
- Assessing the impact of community-based interventions on hypertension and diabetes management in three Minnesota communities: findings from the prospective evaluation of US HealthRise programs 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Measurement Matters: Changing Penalty Calculations under the Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) Cost Hospitals Millions 94%
- Integrating Community-Based Health Information System with a Patient-Centered Medical Home to Improve Care of Patients with Hypertension: A Longitudinal Observational Study Protocol 91%
- Urban-Rural Disparities in Spatio-Temporal Accessibility of Pharmacy Care: A Case Study of Vermont, USA 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Measure what matters: counts of hospitalized patients are a better metric for health system capacity planning for a reopening 92%
- Clinical Utility of Automatable Prediction Models for Improving Palliative and End-Of-Life Care Outcomes: Towards Routine Decision Analysis Before Implementation 91%
- Assessing the quality of clinical and administrative data extracted from hospitals: The General Medicine Inpatient Initiative (GEMINI) experience 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- A novel methodology to measure waiting times for community-based specialist care in a public healthcare system 90%
- The Amortization of Funding Gene Therapies: Making the “Intangibles” Tangible for Patients 89%
- Long-term Public Healthcare Burden Associated with Intimate Partner Violence among Canadian Women: A Cohort Study 89%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.