Synthesis Of Research On Patient-Centered Medical Homes Brings Systematic Differences Into Relief

• Published in: Health Affairs Vol. 36; no. 3; pp. 500 - 508
• Main Authors: Sinaiko, Anna D, Landrum, Mary Beth, Meyers, David J, Alidina, Shehnaz, Maeng, Daniel D, Friedberg, Mark W, Kern, Lisa M, Edwards, Alison M, Flieger, Signe Peterson, Houck, Patricia R, Peele, Pamela, Reid, Robert J, McGraves-Lloyd, Katharine, Finison, Karl, Rosenthal, Meredith B
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States The People to People Health Foundation, Inc., Project HOPE 01-03-2017
• Subjects: Ambulatory care; Breast cancer; Cancer; Cervical cancer; Cervix; Collaboration; Comorbidity; Cost control; Diabetes; Early Detection of Cancer; Emergency medical care; Emergency medical services; Emergency Service, Hospital; Expenditures; Health care; Health Care Costs; Health care facilities; Health care policy; Health economics; Health services; Health Services Research; Heterogeneity; Hospitals; Humans; Identification; Initiatives; Intervention; Literature reviews; Medical research; Medical screening; Meta-analysis; Patient-Centered Care - economics; Patient-Centered Care - organization & administration; Patients; Primary care; Public health; Quality; Quality of Health Care - organization & administration; Reduction; Screening; Studies; Systematic review; United States > US; Pennsylvania; Cost of Health Care; Quality Of Care; Primary Care
• ISSN: 0278-2715; 1544-5208
• DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1235

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model emphasizes comprehensive, coordinated, patient-centered care, with the goals of reducing spending and improving quality. To evaluate the impact of PCMH initiatives on utilization, cost, and quality, we conducted a meta-analysis of methodologically standardized findings from evaluations of eleven major PCMH initiatives. There was significant heterogeneity across individual evaluations in many outcomes. Across evaluations, PCMH initiatives were not associated with changes in the majority of outcomes studied, including primary care, emergency department, and inpatient visits and four quality measures. The initiatives were associated with a 1.5 percent reduction in the use of specialty visits and a 1.2 percent increase in cervical cancer screening among all patients, and a 4.2 percent reduction in total spending (excluding pharmacy spending) and a 1.4 percent increase in breast cancer screening among higher-morbidity patients. These associations were significant. Identification of the components of PCMHs likely to improve outcomes is critical to decisions about investing resources in primary care.