Patient-Centered Medical Homes in Community Oncology Practices: Changes in Spending and Care Quality Associated With the COME HOME Experience

PURPOSE: We examined whether the Community Oncology Medical Home (COME HOME) program, a medical home program implemented in seven community oncology practices, was associated with changes in spending and care quality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared outcomes from elderly fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed between 2011 and 2015 with breast, lung, colorectal, thyroid, or pancreatic cancer, lymphoma, or melanoma and served by COME HOME practices before and after program implementation versus similar beneficiaries served by other geographically proximate oncologists. Difference-in-differences analysis compared changes in outcomes for COME HOME patients versus concurrent controls. Propensity score matching and regression methods were adjusted for clinical and sociodemographic differences. Our primary outcome was 6-month medical spending per beneficiary. Secondary outcomes included 6-month out-of-pocket spending, inpatient and ambulatory care–sensitive hospitalizations, readmissions, length of stay, and emergency department and evaluation and management visits. RESULTS: Before COME HOME, 6-month medical spending was $2,975 higher for the study group compared with controls (95$1,635 to $4,315; P \u3c .001) and increasing at a similar rate. After intervention, this difference was reduced to$318 (95% CI, −$1,105 to$1,741; P = .661), a significant change of −$2,657 (95$4,631 to −$683; P = .008) or 8.1$32,866). COME HOME was also associated with significantly reduced (10.2 %) emergency department visits per 1,000 patients per 6-month period (P = .024). There were no statistically significant differences in other outcomes. CONCLUSION: COME HOME was associated with reduced Medicare spending and improved emergency department use. The patient-centered medical home model holds promise for oncology practices, but improvements were not uniform

Establishing a Primary Care Alliance for Conducting Cancer Prevention Clinical Research at Community Sites

In September 2020, the National Cancer Institute convened the first PARTNRS Workshop as an initiative to forge partnerships between oncologists, primary care professionals, and non-oncology specialists for promoting patient accrual into cancer prevention trials. This effort is aimed at bringing about more effective accrual methods to generate decisive outcomes in cancer prevention research. The workshop convened to inspire solutions to challenges encountered during the development and implementation of cancer prevention trials. Ultimately, strategies suggested for protocol development might enhance integration of these trials into community settings where a diversity of patients might be accrued. Research Bases (cancer research organizations that develop protocols) could encourage more involvement of primary care professionals, relevant prevention specialists, and patient representatives with protocol development beginning at the concept level to improve adoptability of the trials within community facilities, and consider various incentives to primary care professionals (i.e., remuneration). Principal investigators serving as liaisons for the NCORP affiliates and sub-affiliates, might produce and maintain Prevention Research Champions lists of PCPs and non-oncology specialists relevant in prevention research who can attract health professionals to consider incorporating prevention research into their practices. Finally, patient advocates and community health providers might convince patients of the benefits of trial-participation and encourage shared-decision making