7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Association of Private Equity Acquisition of Physician Practices With Changes in Health Care Spending and Utilization

      research-article
      , MPA 1 , , MD, PhD 2 , , PhD, MPP 1 , 3 , , PhD 2 , , MD, MPP, MSHP 4 ,
      JAMA Health Forum
      American Medical Association

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          What are the implications of private equity acquisition of physician practices for health care spending and utilization?

          Findings

          This difference-in-differences event study of 578 private equity−acquired dermatology, gastroenterology, and ophthalmology physician practices and 2874 similar independent practices found that spending, new and unique patient volume, and total encounters increased differentially compared with controls. The share of outpatient visits longer than 30 minutes increased, and there were modest differences along key outcomes within specialties.

          Meaning

          The findings of this economic evaluation suggest that among a large commercially insured population, private equity acquisitions of physician practices were associated with increased health care spending and several measures of utilization.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Private equity acquisitions of physician practices in the US have been increasing rapidly; however, the implications for health care delivery and spending are unclear.

          Objective

          To examine changes in prices and utilization associated with private equity acquisitions of physician practices across multiple specialties.

          Design, Settings, and Participants

          This was a difference-in-differences event study of US physician practices specialized in dermatology, gastroenterology, and ophthalmology that were acquired by private equity firms from 2016 to 2020. Within each specialty, each private equity−acquired (PE-acquired) practice was matched with as many as 5 control practices based on the preacquisition number of unique patients, encounters, risk score, share of services billed out-of-network, and spending. The PE-acquired practices were compared with matched controls through year 2 after acquisition, using a difference-in-differences event study. Data analyses were performed from March 2021 to February 2022.

          Exposures

          Private equity acquisition of physician practices.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Measures of spending and utilization, including the charge and price (amount paid) per claim, new and unique patients, and total encounters.

          Results

          Compared with the 2874 control practices, the 578 PE-acquired physician practices exhibited an average increase of $71 (+20.2%) charged per claim (95% CI, 13.1%-27.3%; P < .001) and $23 (+11.0%) in the allowed amount per claim (95% CI, 5.6%-16.5%; P < .001). The PE-acquired practices increased their numbers of unique patients seen by 25.8% (95% CI, 15.8%-35.6%; P < .001) compared with control practices, driven by a 37.9% increase in visits by new patients (95% CI, 25.6%-50.2%; P < .001). In aggregate, their volume of encounters increased by 16.3% (95% CI, 1.0%-32.0%; P = .04) compared with the control group, with a 9.4% increase in the share of office visits for established patients that were billed as longer than 30 minutes (95% CI, 1.7%-17.0%; P = .02). No statistically significant changes in patient risk scores were found between PE-acquired practices and controls. Within specialties, we found modest differences along selected outcomes.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          In this difference-in-differences study, private equity acquisition of physician practices in dermatology, gastroenterology, and ophthalmology were associated with differential increases in allowed amount and charges per claim, volume of encounters, and new patients seen, as well as some changes in billing and coding.

          Abstract

          This difference-in-differences study of private equity acquisition of physician practices examines changes in prices and utilization associated with acquisition.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Difference-in-Differences with multiple time periods

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Why We Should Not Be Indifferent to Specification Choices for Difference-in-Differences

              To evaluate the effects of specification choices on the accuracy of estimates in difference-in-differences (DID) models.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Health Forum
                JAMA Health Forum
                JAMA Health Forum
                American Medical Association
                2689-0186
                2 September 2022
                September 2022
                2 September 2022
                : 3
                : 9
                : e222886
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
                [2 ]Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
                [3 ]Carey Business School, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
                [4 ]Division of General Internal Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: July 8, 2022.
                Published: September 2, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.2886
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2022 Singh Y et al. JAMA Health Forum.
                Corresponding Author: Jane M. Zhu, MD, MPP, MSHP, General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Portland, OR 97239 ( zhujan@ 123456ohsu.edu ).
                Author Contributions: Ms Singh and Dr Zhu had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: All authors.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Singh, Song, Polsky, Zhu.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Singh, Bruch, Zhu.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Singh, Song, Polsky, Zhu.
                Statistical analysis: Singh, Song, Bruch.
                Obtained funding: Song, Zhu.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Zhu.
                Supervision: Song, Zhu.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Song reported grants from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) during the conduct of the study; and grants from National Institute on Aging and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation; personal fees from the Research Triangle Institute for Medicare risk adjustment work, Google Ventures, VBID Health, and the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans, all outside of this work. Dr Polsky reported personal fees from Extend Health and Amazon outside the submitted work. Dr Zhu reported personal fees from Omada Health and grants from National Institute of Mental Health outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: This study was supported by the National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation (Dr Zhu) and the NIH Director’s Early Independence Award (No. DP5-OD024564; Dr Song).
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Disclaimer: Research for this article is based in part on health care claims data compiled and maintained by FAIR Health, Inc. The authors are solely responsible for the research and conclusions reflected in this article. FAIR Health is not responsible for the conduct of the research or for any of the opinions expressed in this article. Dr Song is an Associate Editor of JAMA Health Forum but was not involved in any of the decisions regarding review of the manuscript or its acceptance.
                Article
                aoi220054
                10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.2886
                9440392
                36218927
                3e8feb5b-d0cb-43db-8ce7-96eb4df5f715
                Copyright 2022 Singh Y et al. JAMA Health Forum.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 24 May 2022
                : 8 July 2022
                Categories
                Research
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Featured
                Online Only
                Comments

                Comments

                Comment on this article