DPC and the pandemic: more capable than FFS? Or less?

DPC advocates are talking a lot these days about how a pandemic shows the superiority of direct primary care. Today, I learned this. Along with individualized medicine and the flexibility of fewer patients, however, comes one negative side effect: as Dr. Donohoe puts it, “the biggest roadblock to more people doing Direct Care pediatrics isContinue reading “DPC and the pandemic: more capable than FFS? Or less?”

A moment of clarity about selection bias – at a DPC summit.

At 2019 Summit, Mike Tuggy, MD, FAAFP, presented this: What Have Primary Care Practices Provided to Employers Who Invested in Primary Care? The Results Speak for Themselves–Reports from Across the U.S.2019 DPCSummit62019 Direct Primary Care (DPC) Summit His presentation began with high praise for Qliance and others. He suggested that these models might be usedContinue reading “A moment of clarity about selection bias – at a DPC summit.”

A single-post critique of AEG/WP’s recommendation on direct primary care.

1/13/2020 Update. See this post for some cost-adjusted data that suggests that direct primary care has net positive effects. My crude analysis suggesting that DPC might have worked, at least a little, maybe once, has since been firmly contradicted by actuarial evidence. Here’s a chronological list of posts relating to AEG/WP’s “Healthcare Innovations”.

To learn how much direct primary care can do, try it first in the ACA-compliant, full-benefit individual market.

If Georgia must mandate the availability of direct primary care, here’s how. For some future open enrollment period, the individual market will offer paired plans that differ only by how primary care is paid for and how it is received. Bigco, for example, offers Bigco Silver FFS and Bigco Silver Direct ; MajorCo probably offersContinue reading “To learn how much direct primary care can do, try it first in the ACA-compliant, full-benefit individual market.”

Three bad ways to bet the health of Georgia citizens on direct primary care.

Every published claim that direct primary care makes a significant dent in necessary health care spending is dubious at best. See, for example, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. When the data from the Union County clinic — a Georgia Public Policy Foundation favorite — is age-adjusted, it indicatesContinue reading “Three bad ways to bet the health of Georgia citizens on direct primary care.”

Nextera’s marketing presentation establishes huge selection bias, while revealing modest evidence that Nextera cuts cost for some of its patients. But the data set is tiny, old, and contaminated by results for fee for service patients!

The basic premise of AEG/WP’s advocacy for direct primary care is succinctly stated in “Healthcare Innovations in Georgia: Two Recommendations” at page 24. “Establishing a relationship with a doctor for a fixed monthly fee can induce and empower many patients to see their primary care physician regularly, which results in decreased healthcare expenses and reducedContinue reading “Nextera’s marketing presentation establishes huge selection bias, while revealing modest evidence that Nextera cuts cost for some of its patients. But the data set is tiny, old, and contaminated by results for fee for service patients!”

The two largest and most current AEG/WP examples of downstream cost reduction failed to adequately address selection bias.

Although the AEG/WP report does not support its key claim with data or citation, the report’s authors responded to my request for information by indicating their sources. One of them was an e-zine article about the CHI clinic. The other two were promotional brochures, denominated case studies used, by the DPC companies Paladina and Nextera,Continue reading “The two largest and most current AEG/WP examples of downstream cost reduction failed to adequately address selection bias.”

Why did Wilson Partners’ research into DPC cost-reduction bypass uniquely available and pointedly relevant data?

As noted in a prior post, the report by the Anderson Economic Group and Wilson Partners supported the assumption that direct primary care reduces downstream care cost by 15% with nothing more than a cryptic reference to “research and case studies prepared by Wilson Partners”, presented with neither data nor citation. Initially, I thought thisContinue reading “Why did Wilson Partners’ research into DPC cost-reduction bypass uniquely available and pointedly relevant data?”

Selection bias infected the best documented argument that direct primary care reduced downstream costs.

A unique and powerful opportunity for quantitatively informed assessment of such claims has come from a DPC clinic serving employees of Union County. There, health plan members are able to choose between receiving primary care in a DPC clinic or through physicians under traditional model of insurance and fee for service. Mark Watson is theContinue reading “Selection bias infected the best documented argument that direct primary care reduced downstream costs.”

The marketplace reached a judgment about direct primary care pioneer, Qliance.

Washington State is deservedly recognized as the birthplace and one of the most prominent frontiers for DPC, in large part because of Qliance. The Seattle-based DPC conglomerate is recognized as an exemplary market force in the private sector of health care. Major investors such as Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos have propelled Qliance . . .Continue reading “The marketplace reached a judgment about direct primary care pioneer, Qliance.”