The Mass Division of Health Care Policy and Finance sponsored an impressive review by RAND researchers of potential cost-saving opportunities in Massachusetts, which was published in August. I blogged about this late this summer, and have always felt that this extensive analysis didn't get nearly enough attention.
The NEJM last week published an article by same RAND researchers extending this analysis to the rest of the country.
This remains an important study - and I'm glad to see an extrapolation getting new press.
I'm also intrigued by the differences in findings.
Hospital rate setting: Maximum savings in MA 4%; US 2%
Healthcare IT: Maximum savings in MA 1.8%; US 1.5%; Maximum increase in costs in MA 0.6%; in US 0.8%
Expand scope of practice for NPs and PAs: MA range savings 0.6%-1.3%; US 0.3%-0.5%
Medical home: MA maximum savings 0.9%; US 1.2%
Disease management: MA maximum savings 0.1%; US maximum savings 1.3%
It makes sense that rate setting might be more effective in Massachusetts to the extent that prices are higher. In fairness, this might not be a 1:1 comparison since the NEJM lumps a few different options together. Scope of practice savings might be different based on supply of physician and non-physician providers. I'm surprised to see higher projections of savings for medical home, since our specialist:primary care ratio is high in Massachusetts. I also can't explain why disease management would have so much higher projected maximum savings in the US overall compared to Massachusetts.
This analytic work is especially important as we consider what cost-control mechanisms should be included in health care reform.
