The impacts of accountable care organizations on patient experience, health outcomes and costs: a rapid review

37Citations
Citations of this article
115Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: Accountable care organizations were implemented as a system-level approach to address quality differences and curb increasing healthcare costs in the United States of America, and have garnered the interest of policy makers in other countries to support better management of patients. The objectives of this paper are to: (1) identify the impacts of accountable care organizations on improving the quadruple aim goals of improving patient experience of care, enhancing population health outcomes, reducing the per capita cost of health care and ensuring positive provider experiences and (2) determine how and why such impacts have been achieved through accountable care organizations. Methods: We used a rapid review approach, searching Health Systems Evidence (for systematic reviews) and PubMed (for reviews and studies). Results were reviewed for inclusion independently by two researchers. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked for consistency by another. Results: We identified one recent systematic review and 59 primary studies that addressed the first objective (n = 54), the second objective (n = 4) or both objectives (n = 1). The reviewed studies suggest that accountable care organizations reduce costs without reducing quality. Key findings related to objective 1 include: (1) there are positive trends across the quadruple–aim outcomes for accountable care organizations as compared to Medicare fee-for-service or group physician fee-for-service models; (2) accountable care organizations produced modest cost savings, which are largely attributable to savings in outpatient expenses among the most medically complex patients and reductions in the delivery of low-value services; (3) accountable care organization models met the majority of quality measures and perform better than their fee-for-service counterparts and (4) there is relatively little evidence about the impact of accountable care organizations on provider experience. Qualitative studies related to objective 2 highlighted mechanisms that were important for enabling accountable care organizations, including supplemental staff to enhance coordination and accountable care organization-wide electronic health records. Conclusions: General trends and increased adoption of models similar to accountable care organizations outside of the USA suggest that these models outperform traditional fee-for-service models across the quadruple aim goals, although with mixed evidence about health outcomes.

References Powered by Scopus

A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies

6499Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Development of AMSTAR: A measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews

3402Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A scoping review of rapid review methods

711Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Challenges and strategies for wide-scale artificial intelligence (AI) deployment in healthcare practices: A perspective for healthcare organizations

44Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Revitalizing Primary Care, Part 2: Hopes for the Future

18Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The beginnings of health system transformation: How Ontario Health Teams are implementing change in the context of uncertainty

13Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wilson, M., Guta, A., Waddell, K., Lavis, J., Reid, R., & Evans, C. (2020, April 1). The impacts of accountable care organizations on patient experience, health outcomes and costs: a rapid review. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1177/1355819620913141

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 34

74%

Researcher 6

13%

Professor / Associate Prof. 5

11%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

2%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 13

38%

Social Sciences 9

26%

Nursing and Health Professions 6

18%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 6

18%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 5

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free